Felix

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JOSEPH TROTTER, No. 2:17-cv-14-JAM-EFB PS Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS MARIC FELIX; NELSON FELIX; JOHN FLANAGAN; and FUSION PROPERTY MANAGEMENT COMPANY, Defendants. 17 The court previously dismissed plaintiff’s first amended complaint for failure to state a claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). ECF No. 7. Plaintiff was granted leave to file an amended complaint, and he has now submitted a second amended complaint. As discussed below, the second amended complaint fails to state a claim and must too be dismissed. As previously explained to plaintiff, 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 state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 554, 562-563 (2007) 26 …