Zimmer

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 SAMUEL DEREK JACKSON, Case No. 1:23-cv-01223-JLT-HBK 12 Plaintiff, AMENDED FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS TO DISMISS CASE1

13 v. (Doc. No. 12) 14 DARRELL WORTHY and CYNTHIA

WORTHY, FOURTEEN-DAY OBJECTION PERIOD

15 Defendants. 16

17 18 Pending review before the Court is Plaintiff’s pro se First Amended Complaint. (Doc. No. 19 12). For the reasons set forth below, the undersigned recommends that the district court dismiss 20 this action because the First Amended Complaint fails to state a cognizable federal claim and any 21 further amendments would be futile. 22 SCREENING REQUIREMENT 23 Because Plaintiff is proceeding in forma pauperis, the Court may dismiss a case “at any 24 time” if the Court determines, inter alia, the action is frivolous or malicious, fails to state claim 25 on which relief can be granted, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from 26

27 1 This matter was referred to the undersigned pursuant to 28…