Hinjosa

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 RHONDA ORTEGA, No. 2:22-cv-1406 KJM DB PS Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TONY HINJOSA, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff Rhonda Ortega is proceeding in this action pro se. This matter was referred to the undersigned in accordance with Local Rule 302(c)(21) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Pending before the court are plaintiff’s complaint, motion to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, motion to appoint counsel, and “motion for court order.” (ECF Nos. 1-4.) Plaintiff’s pleadings consist of incomprehensible and delusional allegations. The court is required to screen complaints brought by parties proceeding in forma pauperis. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2); see also Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1129 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc). Here, plaintiff’s complaint is deficient. Accordingly, for the reasons stated below, the undersigned will recommend that plaintiff’s complaint be dismissed without…