Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-02705/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-02705-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MIGUEL DIAZ,

Plaintiff,

v.

R. FOX, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:14-cv-2705 JAM CKD P

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, who seeks relief 

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On January 20, 2015, plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed for 

failure to state a claim, and he was granted one opportunity to amend. Before the court is 

plaintiff’s amended complaint (“FAC”), filed on April 13, 2015. (ECF No. 12.) 

The court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against a 

governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The 

court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are legally 

“frivolous or malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek 

monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1), (2).

Having reviewed the FAC, the undersigned concludes that it fails to state a claim under 

the legal standards set forth in the January 20, 2015 screening order. Because it appears that 

another round of amendment would be futile, the undersigned will recommend dismissal of this 

Case 2:14-cv-02705-JAM-CKD Document 13 Filed 05/28/15 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

action.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed with 

prejudice for failure to state a claim.

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 

after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 

with the court. Such a document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings 

and Recommendations." Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified 

time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 

(9th Cir. 1991). 

Dated: May 28, 2015

2 / diaz2705.fac

_____________________________________

CAROLYN K. DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:14-cv-02705-JAM-CKD Document 13 Filed 05/28/15 Page 2 of 2