Artley

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ANDREW KEENE FOWERS, No. 2:20-cv-0947 DB P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

14 PAUL ARTLEY, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 18 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff claims a device was inserted in his body and is being used to torture him. 19 Presently before the court is plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 6) and his 20 complaint for screening (ECF No. 1). For the reasons set forth below, the court will recommend 21 that the complaint be dismissed without leave to amend and deny the motion to proceed in forma 22 pauperis as moot. 23 SCREENING 24 I. Legal Standards 25 The court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against a 26 governmental entity or an officer or employee of a governmental entity. See 28 U.S.C. § 27 1915A(a). The court must dismiss a complaint or…