Sexton

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 GABRIEL OMAR GIGENA, No. 2:23-cv-1661 DJC AC PS Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ANDREA SEXTON, et al, Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is proceeding in this action pro se. The matter was referred to the undersigned by E.D. Cal. R. 302(c)(21). Plaintiff previously filed a request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, and submitted the affidavit required by that statute. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). The motion for IFP was granted, but pursuant to the screening process described below, the complaint was rejected and not served because it did not state a claim upon which relief could be granted. ECF No. 3. Plaintiff was given the opportunity to file an amended complaint suitable for service. Id. Before the court now for screening is plaintiff’s amended complaint. ECF No. 6. I. SCREENING A determination that a plaintiff qualifies financially for…