CDCR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 WILLIAM JOSEPH BABBITT, No. 2:22-cv-02196 DAD AC PS Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF

CORRECTIONS AND

REHABILITATION, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is proceeding in this action pro se. The action was accordingly referred to the undersigned for pretrial purposes by E.D. Cal. 302(c)(21). Plaintiff was previously authorized to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). ECF No. 3; see 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). Plaintiff’s initial complaint was found unsuitable for service pursuant to the screening process described below, and plaintiff was given an opportunity to amend. ECF No. 3. Now before the court for screening is plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint. ECF No. 4. I. SCREENING The federal IFP statute requires federal courts to dismiss a case if the action is legally “frivolous or malicious,” fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks 26 …