Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_21-cv-01471/USCOURTS-caed-2_21-cv-01471-3/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

DENNIS PETILLO, JR.,

Plaintiff,

v.

CSP SAC NEW FOLSOM PRISON,

Defendant.

No. 2:21-cv-01471-DC-AC (PC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING 

THIS ACTION

(Doc. No. 11)

Plaintiff Dennis Petillo, Jr., is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in 

this civil rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter was referred to a United 

States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

On October 28, 2024, the assigned magistrate judge screened Plaintiff’s operative first 

amended complaint and found that Plaintiff had still failed to state any cognizable claims, despite 

having received guidance from the court regarding the contents of his amended complaint. (Doc. 

No. 11.) Notably, the magistrate judge found Plaintiff’s first amended complaint to be 

incomprehensible, apart from alleging a government conspiracy to kill and torture Plaintiff 

through witchcraft, mind control, and cross examination. (Id. at 2.) Consequently, also on October 

28, 2024, the magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations recommending that this 

action be dismissed, without leave to amend, due to Plaintiff’s failure to state a cognizable claim

upon which relief may be granted. (Id. at 3.) Those findings and recommendations were served on 

Case 2:21-cv-01471-DC-AC Document 14 Filed 12/09/24 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

Plaintiff and contained notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within twenty-one (21) 

days from the date of service. (Id. at 4.) On November 22, 2023, Plaintiff filed objections to the 

findings and recommendations and exhibits. (Doc. Nos. 12, 13.)

As with his first amended complaint, Plaintiff’s objections and exhibits are 

incomprehensible; they consist of rambling, nonsensical sentences. (Id.) In short, Plaintiff’s 

purported objections provide no basis upon which to reject the pending findings and 

recommendations.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this court has conducted a 

de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court concludes that the 

findings and recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis.

Accordingly, 

1. The findings and recommendations issued on October 28, 2024 (Doc. No. 11) are 

adopted in full; 

2. This action is dismissed, without leave to amend, due to Plaintiff’s failure to state 

a cognizable claim for relief; and

3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 6, 2024 ___________________________

Dena Coggins

United States District Judge

Case 2:21-cv-01471-DC-AC Document 14 Filed 12/09/24 Page 2 of 2