Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_09-cv-02193/USCOURTS-azd-2_09-cv-02193-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Federal Question: Bivens 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

JDDL

WO KM

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Thomas Stewart, Jr., 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Charles Ryan, et al., 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 09-2193-PHX-RCB (LOA)

ORDER

Plaintiff Thomas Stewart, Jr., who is confined in the Arizona State Prison ComplexEyman, filed a pro se civil rights Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and an Application

to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. On November 10, 2009, the Court denied the Application

to Proceed with leave to re-file. On December 9, 2009, Plaintiff filed a new Application to

Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. #8). By Order filed January 20, 2010, the Court granted

Plaintiff in forma pauperis status and dismissed the Complaint with leave to amend (Doc.

#11).

After receiving an extension of time, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint (Doc.

#17) on March 22, 2010. The Court will dismiss the Amended Complaint with leave to

amend.

I. Statutory Screening of Prisoner Complaints

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

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

§ 1915A(a). The Court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if a plaintiff has raised

Case 2:09-cv-02193-RCB Document 18 Filed 04/27/10 Page 1 of 7
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

JDDL - 2 -

claims that are legally frivolous or malicious, that fail to state a claim upon which relief may

be granted, or that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief.

28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1), (2). 

A pleading must contain a “short and plain statement of the claim showing that the

pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2) (emphasis added). While Rule 8 does not

demand detailed factual allegations, “it demands more than an unadorned, the-defendantunlawfully-harmed-me accusation.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009).

“Threadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory

statements, do not suffice.” Id.

“[A] complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a

claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’” Id. (quoting Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly,

550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). A claim is plausible “when the plaintiff pleads factual content

that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the

misconduct alleged.” Id. “Determining whether a complaint states a plausible claim for

relief [is] . . . a context-specific task that requires the reviewing court to draw on its judicial

experience and common sense.” Id. at 1950. Thus, although a plaintiff’s specific factual

allegations may be consistent with a constitutional claim, a court must assess whether there

are other “more likely explanations” for a defendant’s conduct. Id. at 1951.

If the Court determines that a pleading could be cured by the allegation of other facts,

a pro se litigant is entitled to an opportunity to amend a complaint before dismissal of the

action. See Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1127-29 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc). The Court

should not, however, advise the litigant how to cure the defects. This type of advice “would

undermine district judges’ role as impartial decisionmakers.” Pliler v. Ford, 542 U.S. 225,

231 (2004); see also Lopez, 203 F.3d at 1131 n.13 (declining to decide whether the court was

required to inform a litigant of deficiencies). Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint will be

dismissed for failure to state a claim, with leave to amend because the Amended Complaint

may possibly be saved by amendment.

. . .

Case 2:09-cv-02193-RCB Document 18 Filed 04/27/10 Page 2 of 7
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

JDDL - 3 -

II. Amended Complaint

Plaintiff names the following Defendants in the Amended Complaint: Arizona

Department of Corrections Director Charles Ryan, Deputy Warden Matson, Lt. Allen, and

Deputy Warden Curran. It appears that Plaintiff also intends to name other individuals as

Defendants in the Amended Complaint. However, Plaintiff has not clearly listed these

Defendants; the Court will not hunt through Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint to determine the

number and identity of individuals Plaintiff intends to sue.

Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint consists of a 12-page narrative that appears to contain

numerous claims for relief, followed by three numbered counts. In the numbered counts,

Plaintiff raises claims relating to grievances, disciplinary proceedings, alleged race

discrimination, and conditions of confinement.

Plaintiff seeks money damages.

III. Failure to Comply with Rule 8

Rule 8(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires a “short and plain statement

of the claim.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). Rule 8(d)(1) states that “[e]ach allegation must be

simple, concise, and direct.” A complaint having the factual elements of a cause of action

scattered throughout the complaint and not organized into a “short and plain statement of the

claim” may be dismissed for failure to satisfy Rule 8(a). See Sparling v. Hoffman Constr.

Co., 864 F.2d 635, 640 (9th Cir. 1988); see also McHenry v. Renne, 84 F.3d 1172 (9th Cir.

1996). Rule 10(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure also requires a plaintiff to state

claims in “numbered paragraphs, each limited as far as practicable to a single set of

circumstances.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(b). Moreover, “[i]f doing so would promote clarity, each

claim founded on a separate transaction or occurrence . . . must be stated in a separate count.”

Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(b). It is not the responsibility of the Court to review a rambling narrative

in an attempt to determine the number and nature of a plaintiff’s claims.

Although Plaintiff has used a court-supplied form, the Court has reviewed Plaintiff’s

Amended Complaint and concludes that it fails to comply with Rules 8 and 10 of the Federal

Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint is composed of a 12-page

Case 2:09-cv-02193-RCB Document 18 Filed 04/27/10 Page 3 of 7
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

JDDL - 4 -

narrative followed by three counts that each contain more than one claim for relief.

Plaintiff’s allegations also appear to raise claims against individuals who are not listed as

Defendants in the Amended Complaint. Accordingly, the Court is unable to determine the

number and nature of Plaintiff claims or whether Plaintiff intends to name as Defendants all

individuals discussed in the Amended Complaint. The Court cannot meaningfully review

the Amended Complaint, as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). Accordingly, the Court will

dismiss the Amended Complaint with leave to amend.

IV. Leave to Amend

For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint will be dismissed for

failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Within 30 days, Plaintiff may

submit a second amended complaint to cure the deficiencies outlined above. The Clerk of

Court will mail Plaintiff a court-approved form to use for filing a second amended complaint.

If Plaintiff fails to use the court-approved form, the Court may strike the second amended

complaint and dismiss this action without further notice to Plaintiff.

In any second amended complaint, Plaintiff must write short, plain statements telling

the Court: (1) the constitutional right Plaintiff believes was violated; (2) name of the

Defendant who violated the right; (3) exactly what that Defendant did or failed to do; (4) how

the action or inaction of that Defendant is connected to the violation of Plaintiff’s

constitutional right; and (5) what specific injury Plaintiff suffered because of that

Defendant’s conduct. Rizzo v. Goode, 423 U.S. 362, 371-72, 377 (1976).

Plaintiff must repeat this process for each person he names as a Defendant. If Plaintiff

fails to affirmatively link the conduct of each named Defendant with the specific injury

suffered by Plaintiff, the allegation against that Defendant will be dismissed for failure to

state a claim. Further, Plaintiff must comply with any specific directions set out by the Court

in its discussion of individual claims. Conclusory allegations that a Defendant or group of

Defendants have violated a constitutional right are not acceptable, and will be dismissed.

Plaintiff must clearly designate on the face of the document that it is the “Second

Amended Complaint.” The second amended complaint must be retyped or rewritten in its

Case 2:09-cv-02193-RCB Document 18 Filed 04/27/10 Page 4 of 7
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

JDDL - 5 -

entirety on the court-approved form and may not incorporate any part of the original

Complaint or Amended Complaint by reference. Plaintiff may include only one claim per

count. 

A second amended complaint supersedes the original complaint and first amended

complaint. Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1262 (9th Cir. 1992); Hal Roach Studios v.

Richard Feiner & Co., 896 F.2d 1542, 1546 (9th Cir. 1990). After amendment, the Court will

treat the original complaint and amended complaint as nonexistent. Ferdik, 963 F.2d at 1262.

Any cause of action that was raised in the original complaint or amended complaint is

waived if it is not raised in a second amended complaint. King v. Atiyeh, 814 F.2d 565, 567

(9th Cir. 1987).

Plaintiff should also note that an inmate has no free-standing constitutional right to

a grievance process. In Mann v. Adams, 855 F.2d 639, 640 (9th Cir. 1988), the Ninth Circuit

held that a prisoner does not have a protected liberty interest in prison grievance procedures.

Other circuits have held similarly. See Antonelli v. Sheahan, 81 F.3d 1422, 1430 (7th

Cir.1996); Adams v. Rice, 40 F.3d 72, 75 (4th Cir. 1994); Flick v. Alba, 932 F.2d 728, 729

(8th Cir. 1991). Without a liberty interest, Plaintiff has no procedural due process rights at

stake. 

Further, the mere denial of a grievance does not give rise to the inference of active

unconstitutional behavior. Where a defendant’s only involvement in the allegedly

unconstitutional conduct is the denial of administrative grievances, the failure to intervene

on a prisoner’s behalf to remedy alleged unconstitutional behavior does not amount to active

unconstitutional behavior for purposes of § 1983. Shehee v. Luttrell, 199 F.3d 295, 300 (6th

Cir. 1999). 

Plaintiff should also note that “‘[v]erbal harassment or abuse . . . is not sufficient to

state a constitutional deprivation under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.’” Oltarzewski v. Ruggiero, 830

F.2d 136, 139 (9th Cir. 1987) (quoting Collins v. Cundy, 603 F.2d 825 (10th Cir. 1979)).

Finally, Plaintiff should note that an Eighth Amendment claim requires a sufficiently

culpable state of mind by the Defendants, known as “deliberate indifference.” Farmer v.

Case 2:09-cv-02193-RCB Document 18 Filed 04/27/10 Page 5 of 7
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

JDDL - 6 -

Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 834 (1994). To act with deliberate indifference, a prison official

must both know of and disregard an excessive risk to inmate health; the official must both

be aware of facts from which the inference could be drawn that a substantial risk of serious

harm exists and he must also draw the inference. Id. at 837. 

V. Warnings

A. Release

Plaintiff must pay the unpaid balance of the filing fee within 120 days of his release.

Also, within 30 days of his release, he must either (1) notify the Court that he intends to pay

the balance or (2) show good cause, in writing, why he cannot. Failure to comply may result

in dismissal of this action.

B. Address Changes

Plaintiff must file and serve a notice of a change of address in accordance with Rule

83.3(d) of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff must not include a motion for other

relief with a notice of change of address. Failure to comply may result in dismissal of this

action.

C. Copies

Plaintiff must submit an additional copy of every filing for use by the Court. See

LRCiv 5.4. Failure to comply may result in the filing being stricken without further notice

to Plaintiff.

D. Possible Dismissal

If Plaintiff fails to timely comply with every provision of this Order, including these

warnings, the Court may dismiss this action without further notice. See Ferdik, 963 F.2d at

1260-61 (a district court may dismiss an action for failure to comply with any order of the

Court).

IT IS ORDERED: 

(1) The Amended Complaint (Doc. #17) is dismissed for failure to state a claim.

Plaintiff has 30 days from the date this Order is filed to file a second amended complaint in

compliance with this Order. 

Case 2:09-cv-02193-RCB Document 18 Filed 04/27/10 Page 6 of 7
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

JDDL - 7 -

(2) If Plaintiff fails to file a second amended complaint within 30 days, the Clerk

of Court must, without further notice, enter a judgment of dismissal of this action without

prejudice.

(3) The Clerk of Court must mail Plaintiff a court-approved form for filing a civil

rights complaint by a prisoner.

Dated this 26th day of April , 2010 .

Case 2:09-cv-02193-RCB Document 18 Filed 04/27/10 Page 7 of 7