Thomas v. Hamkar, et al.

Filing 18

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 4/23/2015 RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim. Referred to Judge Troy L. Nunley; Objections due within 14 days. (Yin, K)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

KEITH THOMAS,

12
13
14
15

No. 2:14-cv-2365 TLN CKD P

Plaintiff,
v.

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

B. HAMKAR, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17

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

18

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On January 9, 2015, plaintiff’s original complaint was dismissed

19

for failure to state a claim. (ECF No. 9.) On February 19, 2015, plaintiff was granted leave to

20

file an amended complaint. (ECF No. 14.) Plaintiff has filed an amended complaint, now before

21

the court. (ECF No. 16.)

22

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

23

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

24

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

25

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

26

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

27
28

Having reviewed the amended complaint, the undersigned concludes that it fails to cure
the defects of the original complaint as discussed in the January 9, 2015 screening order. Because
1

1

it appears that another round of amendment would be futile, the undersigned will recommend

2

dismissal of this action.

3
4

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed with
prejudice for failure to state a claim.

5

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

6

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

7

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

8

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

9

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

10

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

11

(9th Cir. 1991).

12

Dated: April 23, 2015

_____________________________________
CAROLYN K. DELANEY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

13
14
15
16
17
18
19

2 / thom2365.fac_fr

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2