Prince Paul Raymond Williams v. California Department of Child Support, et al.

1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 PRINCE PAUL RAYMOND WILLIAMS, No. 1:25-cv-00981-JLT-EPG 10 Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS,

RECOMMENDING THAT THIS CASE BE

11 v.

DISMISSED, WITHOUT PREJUDICE, FOR

12 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF (1) FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM; (2) CHILD SUPPORT, et al., FAILURE TO COMPLY COURT ORDERS, 13 AND (3) FAILURE TO PROSECUTE THIS Defendants. CASE 14 (ECF Nos. 11, 12, 14) 15

OBJECTIONS, IF ANY, DUE WITHIN

16

THIRTY (30) DAYS

17

18 Plaintiff Prince Paul Raymond Williams is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in 19 this civil action. Plaintiff filed the complaint commencing this action on August 7, 2025. (ECF 20 No. 1). He then filed a first amended complaint on September 29, 2025. (ECF No. 11). 21 The Court concludes that the first amended complaint fails to state any cognizable claims 22 because it violates Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a), which requires “a short and plain 23 statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” 24…