Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-02807/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-02807-0/pdf.json

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

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOHN PORTIS,

Plaintiff, 

 v.

Sergeant EVANS, Correctional Officer

FESTUS, and Correctional Officer

ALVEREZ,

Defendants. /

No. C 07-2807 WHA (PR) 

DISMISSAL WITH LEAVE TO

AMEND

Plaintiff, an inmate of San Quentin State Prison, has filed a pro se civil rights complaint

under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff also requests leave to proceed in forma pauperis.

DISCUSSION

A. Standard of Review

Federal courts must engage in a preliminary screening of cases in which prisoners seek

redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915A(a). In its review the court must identify any cognizable claims, and dismiss any claims

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

monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. Id. at 1915A(b)(1),(2). Pro

se pleadings must be liberally construed. Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep't, 901 F.2d 696, 699

(9th Cir. 1990).

///

Case 3:07-cv-02807-WHA Document 5 Filed 07/23/07 Page 1 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two essential elements: 

(1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and (2)

that the violation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law. West v. Atkins,

487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988). 

B. Legal claims

Plaintiff’s entire claim in his complaint reads: “Both Evans and Festus has acted and

treated inmates with disrespect unprofessional and very insulting manner. [¶ ] Copies of (602)

with numerous complaints are attached to this document. And on 5-15-07 C.O. Elverez [sic]

jump on me I walk with a cane.” 

Although the federal rules require brevity in pleading, a complaint must be sufficient to

give the defendants “fair notice” of the claim and the “grounds upon which it rests.” Erickson

v. Pardus, 127 S. Ct. 2197, 2200 (2007) (citations omitted). “[A] complaint ... does not need

detailed factual allegations [to state a claim], . . . [but] a plaintiff's obligation to provide the

'grounds of his 'entitle[ment] to relief' requires more than labels and conclusions, and a

formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do. . . . Factual allegations

must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level." Bell Atlantic Corp. v.

Twombly, 127 S. Ct. 1955, 1964-65 (2007) (citations omitted). The complaint as quoted above

is insufficient to meet this standard.

In amending, plaintiff should bear in mind that he must "set forth specific facts as to

each individual defendant's" actions which he contends violated his constitutional rights. See

Leer v. Murphy, 844 F.2d 628, 634 (9th Cir. 1988). He may not incorporate other documents

by reference; the complaint itself should contain plaintiff’s claims. And he must set out facts

which, if proved, would show the violation of a constitutional right, because that is one element

of a section 1983 claim. See West, 487 U.S. at 48. Treating an inmate disrespectfully,

unprofessionally, or insultingly, however deplorable, is not a constitutional violation. 

CONCLUSION

1. The complaint is DISMISSED with leave to amend, as indicated above, within thirty

days from the date of this order. The amended complaint must include the caption and civil

Case 3:07-cv-02807-WHA Document 5 Filed 07/23/07 Page 2 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

3

case number used in this order and the words AMENDED COMPLAINT on the first page. 

Because an amended complaint completely replaces the original complaint, plaintiff must

include in it all the claims he wishes to present. See Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1262

(9th Cir. 1992). He may not incorporate material from the original complaint by reference. 

Failure to amend within the designated time will result in the dismissal of these claims.

2. It is the plaintiff's responsibility to prosecute this case. Plaintiff must keep the court

informed of any change of address by filing with the clerk a separate paper headed “Notice of

Change of Address.” Papers intended to be filed in this case should be addressed to the clerk

and not to the undersigned. Petitioner also must comply with the Court's orders in a timely

fashion. Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of this action for failure to prosecute

pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 22 , 2007. 

WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

G:\PRO-SE\WHA\CR.07\PORTIS807.DWLTA.wpd

Case 3:07-cv-02807-WHA Document 5 Filed 07/23/07 Page 3 of 3