Loterzstain

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SHELDON RAY NEWSOME, No. 2:19-cv-307-JAM-EFB P Plaintiff, v. ORDER M. LOTERZSTAIN, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff proceeds without counsel in this action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The court dismissed his first amended complaint (ECF No. 14) and he now proceeds with his second amended complaint (ECF No. 18). The court must screen it. Screening I. Legal Standards Pursuant to § 1915(e)(2), the court must dismiss the case at any time if it determines the allegation of poverty is untrue, or if the action is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief against an immune defendant. Although pro se pleadings are liberally construed, see Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520-21 (1972), a complaint, or portion thereof, should be dismissed for failure to state a claim if it fails to set forth “enough facts to…