(PS) Nelson-Rogers v. JP Morgan Chase, N.A. ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MARY ALICE NELSON ROGERS, No. 2:22-cv-01954 TLN CKD PS 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 JP MORGAN CHASE, N.A., et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is proceeding in this action pro se and has paid the filing fee. On March 15, 18 2023, the court ordered plaintiff to show cause why this case should not be dismissed for failure 19 to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. (ECF No. 13.) On March 20, 2023, plaintiff 20 filed a response, highlighting the difficulties faced by pro se plaintiffs and asserting in conclusory 21 terms that defendant JP Morgan Chase violated her constitutional rights. (ECF No. 16.) While 22 the court is sympathetic to the challenges faced by pro se plaintiffs, the fact remains that plaintiff 23 has filed several frivolous lawsuits against JP Morgan Chase, as set forth in the Order to Show 24 Cause. Moreover, nothing in plaintiff’s response nor in the First Amended Complaint suggests 25 that plaintiff can state a claim against any defendant in this action under the federal pleading 26 standards, such that leave to amend would be futile. 27 //// 28 //// ] Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that: 2 1. The First Amended Complaint (ECF No. 7) be dismissed with prejudice for failure to 3 state a claim on which relief can be granted; and 4 2. The Clerk of Court be directed to close this case. 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)(1). Within fourteen days 7 || after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 8 | with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned “Objections 9 || to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file 10 || objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. 11 | Martinez v. Yist, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 12 | Dated: March 27, 2023 / aa / x ly a 13 CAROLYN K DELANEY 14 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 15 16 17 || 2/melson-rogers1954.f&rs 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28