Seitz

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 CHRISTOPHER LIPSEY, JR., Case No.: 1:18-cv-00766-AWI-SKO (PC)

Plaintiff, SECOND ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF

TO FILE THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT

v. OR NOTIFY THE COURT OF HIS DESIRE

TO PROCEED ONLY ON CLAIM FOUND

B. SEITZ, et al., COGNIZABLE

Defendants. 21-DAY DEADLINE

16 Plaintiff Christopher Lipsey, Jr., asserts two causes of action in his second amended complaint. (Doc. 21) In Claim I, Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Seitz retaliated against him in violation of the First Amendment and the California Bane Act. (Id. at 4.) In Claim II, Plaintiff alleges that Defendants Chappuis, Hunrah, Kernan, Quam, and Wannamaker denied him access to the courts. (Id. at 5.) In its screening order, the Court found that Claim I is cognizable but Claim II is not. (Doc. 23). Accordingly, the Court ordered Plaintiff to either file a third amended complaint curing the deficiencies in his pleading OR, in the alternative, notify…