(PS) Ellis v. County of El Dorado Mental Health Division

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 PETER JON ELLIS, No. 2:22-cv-0942 KJM DB PS 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 COUNTY OF ELDORADO MENTAL

HEALTH DIVISION,

15 16 Defendant. 17 18 Plaintiff Peter Jon Ellis is proceeding in this action pro se. This matter was referred to the 19 undersigned in accordance with Local Rule 302(c)(21) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Pending 20 before the court are plaintiff’s second amended complaint, motion to proceed in forma pauperis 21 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, and motion to appoint counsel. (ECF Nos. 2, 18-19.) The second 22 amended complaint alleges that plaintiff was discriminated against as a result of a disability. 23 The court is required to screen complaints brought by parties proceeding in forma 24 pauperis. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2); see also Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1129 (9th Cir. 25 2000) (en banc). Here, plaintiff’s second amended complaint is deficient. Accordingly, for the 26 reasons stated below, plaintiff’s second amended complaint…