Johnson:Bene

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 SEAN-LYONS JOHNSON:BENE, Case No. 22-cv-06782-HSG

8 Plaintiff, ORDER SCREENING AND

DISMISSING AMENDED COMPLAINT

9 v. Re: Dkt. No. 28 10 WELLS FARGO OF SAN LEANDRO, et al., 11 Defendants. 12 13 On January 22, 2024, Plaintiff, who represents himself, filed under seal a document that 14 appears to be an amended complaint. Dkt. No. 28. Because Plaintiff is proceeding in forma 15 pauperis, the Court must screen it for minimal legal viability. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). In 16 doing so now, the Court determines that Plaintiff fails to state a claim, and DISMISSES his 17 complaint with leave to amend, Dkt. No. 28-1, and DENIES the pending motion to seal. Dkt. No. 18 28. 19 I. BACKGROUND 20 Plaintiff initiated this case on November 11, 2022, when he filed suit against Wells Fargo 21 and four of its employees at a branch in San Leandro for supposedly closing his checking account 22 without notice and, on another occasion, requiring him to provide identifying information that was 23 …