(PS) Siratsamy v. Sacramento County Sheriffs Department

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SOMPHOTH BOBY SIRATSAMY, No. 2:21–cv–0678–JAM–KJN PS Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS v. (ECF Nos. 1, 3) SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF DEPARTMENT, et al., 15 Defendants.

17 Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed a barely intelligible complaint against several defendants, and also requested leave to proceed in forma pauperis. (See ECF Nos. 1, 2.) On June 1, 2021, the court granted plaintiff’s IFP request and found that the complaint failed to satisfy Rule 8(a) because it did not state a discernable claim for relief, and that plaintiff failed to establish the court’s subject-matter jurisdiction because the complaint contained no viable federal cause of action and the parties were non-diverse. (ECF No. 3.) Plaintiff was given 30 days to amend the complaint (or file a notice of voluntary dismissal) and was warned that failure to do so by the required deadline may result in sanctions, including “potential dismissal of the action with 26 …