Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05950/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05950-4/pdf.json

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

---

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

JAMES E. SMITH,

Plaintiff,

v.

SCRIBNER, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:04-CV-5950-OWW-LJO-P

ORDER DISMISSING SECOND AMENDED

COMPLAINT, WITH LEAVE TO AMEND,

FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH RULE 8

I. Screening Order

A. Procedural History

Plaintiff James E. Smith (“plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

pauperis in this civil action. Plaintiff filed this action on July 9, 2004, and filed an amended

complaint on September 7, 2004. On January 19, 2005, the court dismissed plaintiff’s amended

complaint, with leave to amend, for failure to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8. In a

separate order issued concurrently with this order, the court directed the Clerk’s Office to file in the

proposed amended complaint plaintiff submitted on June 6, 2005, and docket it as the second

amended complaint.

B. Screening Requirement

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

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

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

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

Case 1:04-cv-05950-OWW -LJO Document 49 Filed 09/28/05 Page 1 of 5
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

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

“Notwithstanding any filing fee, or any portion thereof, that may have been paid, the court shall

dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that . . . the action or appeal . . . fails to state a

claim upon which relief may be granted.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). 

A complaint, or portion thereof, should only be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon

which relief may be granted if it appears beyond doubt that plaintiff can prove no set of facts in

support of the claim or claims that would entitle him to relief. See Hishon v. King & Spalding, 467

U.S. 69, 73 (1984), citingConley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46 (1957); see also Palmer v. Roosevelt

Lake Log Owners Ass'n, 651 F.2d 1289, 1294 (9th Cir. 1981). In reviewing a complaint under this

standard, the court must accept as true the allegations of the complaint in question, Hospital Bldg.

Co. v. Rex Hospital Trustees, 425 U.S. 738, 740 (1976), construe the pleading in the light most

favorable to the plaintiff, and resolve all doubts in the plaintiff's favor. Jenkins v. McKeithen, 395

U.S. 411, 421 (1969).

C. Plaintiff’s Complaint

A plaintiff’s complaint must satisfy the requirement of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a),

which calls for a “short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to

relief.” Rule 8(a) expresses the principle of notice-pleading, whereby the pleader need only give the

opposing party fair notice of a claim. Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46 (1957). Rule 8(a) does

not require an elaborate recitation of every fact a plaintiff may ultimately rely upon at trial, but only

a statement sufficient to “give the defendant fair notice of what the plaintiff's claim is and the

grounds upon which it rests.” Id. at 47. Rule 8(a) also requires that the plaintiff give notice of the

relief which he seeks from the defendants. 

Plaintiff’s second amended complaint does not comply with Rule 8(a). With the exception

of identifying defendant Scribner in the caption of the pleading, plaintiff fails to identify any of the

other defendants, and it is clear from the pleading that there are other defendants. Further, plaintiff’s

allegations are vague, conclusory, and confusing, and fail to place defendants on notice as to the

basis of plaintiff’s claims against them. For example, under First Cause of Action (42 U.S.C. §

1983; Violation of the Fourteenth Amendment Rights) plaintiff alleges, “Defendants an executive

Case 1:04-cv-05950-OWW -LJO Document 49 Filed 09/28/05 Page 2 of 5
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

trial attorney violation of plaintiff rights under official policy, county policy or customs, while acting

in his/her individual and personal capacities; by acting outside all jurisdictions personal and

otherwise in a conspiracy to determine the outcome of the proceedings.” (2nd Amend. Comp., p. 3

¶ 3.) This paragraph, which is independent of the paragraphs preceding and following it, makes no

sense at all and does not constitute a claim for relief that comports with Rule 8. 

Another example is paragraph 7, in which plaintiff alleges, “Defendants violated the

commerce clause under Article I § 8, cl. 3 plaintiff move for a three judge panel, because business

in Louisiana had not signed a reciprocity agreement, since the mandatory character of mississippi

[sic] could not refuse to allow sales of milk under health standards solely, because Louisiana had not

signed a reciprocity agreement since the mandatory character of the reciprocity requirement undluly

[sic] burdened interstate commerce and could not be justified as a permissable [sic] exercise of state

power in mandatory health standards or as constituting a free trade provision permitting trande [sic]

between the state in violation of the Equal Protection clause.” This paragraph, also independent of

the paragraphs preceding and following it, is likewise nonsensical and not in compliance with Rule

8. 

The court will provide plaintiff with one final opportunity to file a complaint that complies

with Rule 8. In addition to this order, plaintiff is directed to review the court’s order of January 19,

2005, dismissing his first amended complaint with leave to amend. Although plaintiff’s third

amended complaint should not be needlessly lengthy or detailed, plaintiff must allege sufficient facts

for the court to ascertain the basis of his claims and whether or not he states cognizable claims for

relief. Plaintiff must, under each separately enumerated claim, set forth the facts that plaintiff

believes give rise to the claim. It is plaintiff’s responsibility to state his claims in a manner that

complies with Rule 8. Plaintiff’s factual allegations must be sufficiently clear that the court can

determine whether or not plaintiff is entitled to proceed on his claims and that defendants can defend

against the claims. 

Plaintiff is admonished that a claim, or cause of action, is one claim. Plaintiff may not, as

he did in his second amended compliant, denote “First Cause of Action” and then proceed to list a

myriad of less than distinct but nevertheless different claims under the cause of action. For each

Case 1:04-cv-05950-OWW -LJO Document 49 Filed 09/28/05 Page 3 of 5
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

legal claim plaintiff is pursuing (e.g., an equal protection claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 or a denial

of access to the courts claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983), plaintiff shall label the claim and set forth the

facts that he believes give rise to the claim. In light of the fact that plaintiff has yet to file a pleading

that complies with Rule 8 and will allow for the court to screen it on the merits, but nevertheless

finds the time to pepper the court with motions seeking injunctive relief that plaintiff is clearly not

entitled to at this juncture, plaintiff’s failure to file a third amended complaint that complies with this

order and the order of January 19, 2005, will result in a recommendation that this action be

dismissed. (See Court Docs. 16, 17, 19, 21, 26, 32, 33, 38, 40, 41, and 42.)

Plaintiff is informed he must demonstrate in his complaint how the conditions complained

of have resulted in a deprivation of plaintiff’s constitutional rights. See Ellis v. Cassidy, 625 F.2d

227 (9th Cir. 1980). The complaint must allege in specific terms how each named defendant is

involved. There can be no liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 unless there is some affirmative link or

connection between a defendant’s actions and the claimed deprivation. Rizzo v. Goode, 423 U.S.

362 (1976); May v. Enomoto, 633 F.2d 164, 167 (9th Cir. 1980); Johnson v. Duffy, 588 F.2d 740,

743 (9th Cir. 1978). 

Finally, plaintiff is advised that Local Rule 15-220 requires that an amended complaint be

complete in itself without reference to any prior pleading. As a general rule, an amended complaint

supersedes 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.

Therefore, in an amended complaint, as in an original complaint, each claim and the involvement

of each defendant must be sufficiently alleged. 

D. Conclusion

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s second amended complaint is dismissed, with leave to amend, for failure

to comply with Rule 8;

2. Within thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order, plaintiff shall file a

third amended complaint setting forth clearly each of his claims and the factual

allegations in support of each claim; and

Case 1:04-cv-05950-OWW -LJO Document 49 Filed 09/28/05 Page 4 of 5
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

5

3. The failure to file a third amended complaint that complies with this order and the

order of January 19, 2005, will result in a recommendation that this action be

dismissed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 28, 2005 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill 

b9ed48 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-05950-OWW -LJO Document 49 Filed 09/28/05 Page 5 of 5