1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MICHAEL ALAN DEAN HILL, No. 2:24-cv-2752 DAD CKD P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 EL DORADO COUNTY SHERIFF, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is an El Dorado County Jail prisoner proceeding pro se and seeking relief 18 pursuant to

. This proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 302 19 pursuant to

(b)(1). On March 27, 2025, the court screened plaintiff’s amended 20 complaint as the court is required to do under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). Plaintiff’s amended 21 complaint was dismissed with leave to amend. Plaintiff has filed a second amended complaint 22 which the court screens. 23 As with plaintiff’s first two pleadings, the second amended complaint violates joinder 24 rules. Under Rule 20 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, plaintiff cannot bring unrelated 25 claims against different defendants. Simply put, plaintiff cannot join claims against defendant B 26 that are not sufficiently connected to those brought against defendant A. Vague allegations 27 concerning conspiracy do not satisfy court rules regarding joinder of claims. 28 ///// 1 Unrelated claims against different defendants must be pursued in separate lawsuits. See 2 George v. Smith,

(7th Cir. 2007). This rule is intended “not only to prevent the 3 sort of morass [a multiple claim, multiple defendant] suit produce[s], but also to ensure that 4 prisoners pay the required filing fees—for the Prison Litigation Reform Act limits to 3 the 5 number of frivolous suits or appeals that any prisoner may file without prepayment of the 6 required fees.

(g).”

7 Giving plaintiff leave to amend a third time to comply with joinder rules appears futile. 8 That being the case, the court will permit plaintiff to proceed on his claim arising under the First 9 Amendment based upon retaliation for protected conduct against defendant Estes in his individual 10 capacity which appears on pages 5 and 6 of the second amended complaint. This is the first claim 11 appearing in the second amended complaint which states a claim upon which relief could be 12 granted. 13 Plaintiff’s claim against defendant Cemo is properly joined. But this claim concerns the 14 manner in which a grievance was processed. Prisoners do not have “a separate constitutional 15 entitlement to a specific prison grievance procedure.” Ramirez v. Galaza,

, 860 (9th 16 Cir. 2003) (citing Mann v. Adams,

(9th Cir. 1988)). The prison grievance 17 procedure does not confer any substantive constitutional rights upon inmates and actions in 18 reviewing and denying inmate appeals generally do not serve as a basis for liability under section 19 1983.

20 None of plaintiff’s other claims are properly joined. 21 In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 22 1. Service is appropriate for defendant Deputy Derek Estes, El Dorado County 23 Sheriff’s Department. 24 2. The Clerk of the Court shall send plaintiff a USM-285 form, one summons, an 25 instruction sheet and a copy of the second amended complaint. 26 ///// 27 ///// 28 ///// 1 3. Within thirty days from the date of this order, plaintiff shall complete the attached 2 || Notice of Submission of Documents and submit the following documents to the court: 3 a. The completed Notice of Submission of Documents; 4 b. One completed summons; 5 c. One completed USM-285 form; and 6 d. Two copies of the second amended complaint. 7 4. Plaintiff need not attempt service on defendant and need not request waiver of service. 8 | Upon receipt of the above-described documents, the court will direct the United States Marshal to 9 || serve the above-named defendant pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4 without payment 10 | of costs. 11 IT IS HERERBY RECOMMENDED that all claims and defendants other than a claim 12 || arising under the First Amendment based upon retaliation for protected conduct against defendant 13 || Estes in his individual capacity which appears on pages 5 and 6 of the second amended complaint 14 || be dismissed. 15 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 16 || assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of

(b)(1). Within fourteen days 17 || after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 18 || with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings 19 | and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified 20 || time waives the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst,

(9th 21 | Cir. 1991). 22 | Dated: October 8, 2025 / □□ I / dle ae

24 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 25 26 hill2752.1 27 28

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MICHAEL ALAN DEAN HILL, No. 2:24-cv-2752 DAD CKD P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. NOTICE OF SUBMISSION 14 EL DORADO COUNTY SHERIFF, et al., OF DOCUMENTS 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff submits the following documents in compliance with the court's order filed 18 _____________________: 19 ____ completed summons form 20 ____ completed USM-285 form 21 ____ copies of the ___________________ Second Amended Complaint 22

23 DATED:

24 25 ____________________ Plaintiff 26

27 28