Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01632/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01632-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SEVAN KAYAIAN, )

)

)

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

)

U.M.C. HOSPITAL, )

)

)

)

Defendant. )

 )

1:06cv01632 AWI DLB

ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT 

WITH LEAVE TO AMEND

Plaintiff Sevan Kayaian (“Plaintiff”), appearing pro se and proceeding in forma pauperis,

filed the instant complaint on November 14, 2006. Plaintiff alleges a violation of the Americans

with Disabilities Act. 

DISCUSSION

A. Screening Standard

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), the court must conduct an initial review of the

complaint for sufficiency to state a claim. The court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof

if the court determines that the action is legally “frivolous or malicious,” fails to state a claim

upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune

from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). If the court determines that the complaint fails to state

a claim, leave to amend may be granted to the extent that the deficiencies of the complaint can be

cured by amendment.

Case 1:06-cv-01632-LJO -DLB Document 4 Filed 11/21/06 Page 1 of 4
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

In reviewing a complaint under this standard, the Court must accept as true the allegations

of the complaint in question, Hospital Bldg. Co. v. Trustees of Rex Hospital, 425 U.S. 738, 740

(1976), construe the pro se pleadings liberally in the light most favorable to the Plaintiff, Resnick

v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000), and resolve all doubts in the Plaintiff’s favor,

Jenkins v. McKeithen, 395 U.S. 411, 421 (1969).

Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a) provides:

A pleading which sets forth a claim for relief, whether an original claim, counterclaim, 

cross-claim, or third-party claim, shall contain (1) a short and plain statement of the

grounds upon which the court’s jurisdiction depends, unless the court already has

jurisdiction and the claim needs no new grounds of jurisdiction to support it, (2) a short

and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief, and (3) a

demand for judgment for the relief the pleader seeks. Relief in the alternative or of

several different types may be demanded.

A complaint must contain a short and plain statement as required by Fed. R. Civ. P.

8(a)(2). Although the Federal Rules adopt a flexible pleading policy, a complaint must give fair

notice and state the elements of the claim plainly and succinctly. Jones v. Community Redev.

Agency, 733 F.2d 646, 649 (9th Cir. 1984). Plaintiff must allege with at least some degree of

particularity overt acts which the defendants engaged in that support Plaintiff's claim. Id. 

Although a complaint need not outline all elements of a claim, it must be possible to infer from

the allegations that all elements exist and that there is entitlement to relief under some viable

legal theory. Walker v. South Cent. Bell Telephone Co., 904 F.2d 275, 277 (5th Cir. 1990);

Lewis v. ACB Business Service, Inc., 135 F.3d 389, 405-06 (6th Cir. 1998).

In reviewing a complaint under this standard, the Court must accept as true the allegations

of the complaint in question, Hospital Bldg. Co. v. Trustees of Rex Hospital, 425 U.S. 738, 740

(1976), construe the pro se pleadings liberally in the light most favorable to the Plaintiff, Resnick

v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000), and resolve all doubts in the Plaintiff’s favor,

Jenkins v. McKeithen, 395 U.S. 411, 421 (1969).

B. Plaintiff’s Allegations

Plaintiff’s complaint, consisting of one page, alleges that Defendant U.M.C. Hospital

“tortured” him by keeping him strapped down and administering medication to him against his

will. He also alleges that the doctor refused to give him oxygen or his inhaler. He contends that

Case 1:06-cv-01632-LJO -DLB Document 4 Filed 11/21/06 Page 2 of 4
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

these acts violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and requests those involved “go

to jail and pay for taking and keeping [his] property.” Complaint, at 1. 

C. Analysis

Title II of the ADA provides that:

No qualified individual with a disability shall, by reason of such disability, be

excluded from participation in or denied the benefits of the services, programs, or

activities of a public entity, or be subjected to discrimination by any such entity.

42 U.S.C. § 12132. To establish a claim under the ADA, Plaintiff must demonstrate that (1) he is

a person with a disability; (2) that he is otherwise qualified; and that the defendants’ actions

either (3) excluded his participation or denied him the benefits of a service, program, or activity;

or (4) otherwise subjected him to discrimination on the basis of his physical handicap. See Duffy

v. Riveland, 98 F.3d 447, 455 (9th Cir. 1996). 

Plaintiff has wholly failed to state a claim for violation of the ADA. Plaintiff has not set

forth any of the necessary elements, including the very basic allegation that he even has a

disability. Given Plaintiff’s status as a pro se litigant and the fact that the Court is unable to

conclude that Plaintiff cannot cure these deficiencies, Plaintiff will be granted leave to amend. 

Plaintiff is informed that the Court cannot refer to a prior pleading in order to make his

amended complaint complete. Local Rule 15-220 requires that an amended complaint be

complete in itself without reference to any prior pleading. This is because, as a general rule, an

amended complaint supercedes the original complaint. See Loux v. Rhay, 375 F.2d 55, 57 (9th

Cir. 1967). Once Plaintiff files an amended complaint, the original pleading no longer serves any

function in the case. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s complaint is DISMISSED

WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. Plaintiff may file an amended complaint within thirty (30) days of

the date of service of this order. Plaintiff’s complaint should be clearly titled, “First Amended 

///

///

///

///

Case 1:06-cv-01632-LJO -DLB Document 4 Filed 11/21/06 Page 3 of 4
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

4

Complaint,” and shall refer to the case number assigned to this action. If Plaintiff does not file

an amended complaint within this time frame, the Court will recommend that this action be

dismissed.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: November 20, 2006 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

3b142a UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-01632-LJO -DLB Document 4 Filed 11/21/06 Page 4 of 4