Chapman

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MATTHEW CHAPMAN, Case No. 1:22-cv-01531-BAM 12 Plaintiff, ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO SHOW

CAUSE WHY THIS ACTION SHOULD NOT

13 v. BE DISMISSED FOR LACK OF

JURISDICTION

14 UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE, (Doc. 5) 15 Defendant.

FOURTEEN-DAY DEADLINE

16 17 Plaintiff Matthew Chapman (“Plaintiff”), proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, 18 initiated this action pursuant to the Administrative Procedures Act (“APA”) on November 29, 19 2022. (Doc. 1.) On June 23, 2023, the Court screened Plaintiff’s complaint and granted leave to 20 amend. (Doc. 4.) Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) on July 24, 2023. (Doc. 5.) 21 The Court screens complaints brought by persons proceeding in pro se and in forma 22 pauperis. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). Plaintiff’s complaint, or any portion thereof, is subject to 23 dismissal if it is frivolous or malicious, if it fails to state a claim upon which relief may be 24 granted, or if it seeks monetary relief…