Dorothy

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JEAN MARC VAN DEN HEUVEL, No. 2:21–cv–2176–TLN–CKD PS 12 Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 13 v. TO DISMISS 14 DOROTHY, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff, who is proceeding without counsel in this action,1 was granted leave to proceed 18 in forma pauperis (“IFP”) on January 10, 2022 (ECF No. 4.) The court has now granted plaintiff 19 two opportunities to amend his complaint and multiple extensions of time. (ECF Nos. 7, 9, 11, 14, 20 19.) As set forth below, plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. 21 Accordingly, the court recommends dismissing plaintiff’s SAC without leave to amend. 28 22 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B); Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1126-27 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc) 23 (“[S]ection 1915(e) not only permits but requires a district court to dismiss an [IFP] complaint 24 that fails to state a claim.”). 25 Legal Standards 26 To avoid dismissal for failure to state a claim, a complaint must contain more…