Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01006/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01006-4/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

United States District Court

Eastern District of California 

Chris Langley, Civ. S 05-1006 DFL PAN P

vs. Findings and Recommendations

Placer County Sheriff’s

Department, et al.,

Defendants.

-oOoJuly 15, 2005, the court dismissed plaintiff’s complaint for

failure to state a claim and gave plaintiff 45 days to file an

amended complaint. Plaintiff has filed an amended complaint.

I have reviewed plaintiff’s amended complaint pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 1915A and find it does not state a cognizable claim

against any defendant.

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, plaintiff must

allege an identified defendant deprived plaintiff of a right

secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States

while acting under color of state law. West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 

Case 2:05-cv-01006-DFL-PAN Document 13 Filed 08/31/05 Page 1 of 3
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

2

42, 48-49 (1988). A local government is subject to liability for

constitutional torts committed by its officials when an

individual with final policy making authority acted pursuant to

an official policy or custom or failed to act based on a policy

of inaction amounting to deliberate indifference. Monell v. N.Y.

Dep’t of Soc. Servs., 436 U.S. 658, 690-91 (1978); Oviatt v.

Pearce, 954 F.2d 1470, 1474 (9th Cir. 1992). An official is

deliberately indifferent when he knows of and disregards a risk

of injury or harm that “is not one that today’s society chooses

to tolerate.” See Helling v. McKinney, 509 U.S. 25, 35 (1993);

Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 837 (1994). Delay in treatment

does not amount to deliberate indifference unless the delay

causes additional harm. Shapley v. Nevada Bd. of State Prison

Comm'rs, 766 F.2d 404, 407 (9th Cir. 1985) (per curiam). 

Plaintiff alleges he damaged a tooth when he encountered a

rock in his food, complained of pain and requested medical

attention and because he persisted in his request he was seen by

medical staff within 150 minutes, when he received pain

medication. A dentist examined plaintiff the next day. He

alleges no harm from the delay.

Plaintiff fails to state a claim.

For these reasons, I recommend this action be dismissed. 

See Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1128 (9th Cir. 2000) (indigent

prisoner proceeding without counsel must be given leave to file

amended complaint unless the court can rule out any possibility

that the plaintiff could state a claim).

Case 2:05-cv-01006-DFL-PAN Document 13 Filed 08/31/05 Page 2 of 3
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

3

Pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l), these

findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States

District Judge assigned to this case. Written objections may be

filed within 20 days of service of these findings and

recommendations. The document should be captioned “Objections to

Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” The district

judge may accept, reject, or modify these findings and

recommendations in whole or in part.

Dated: August 30, 2005. 

 /s/ Peter A. Nowinski 

 PETER A. NOWINSKI

 Magistrate Judge

Case 2:05-cv-01006-DFL-PAN Document 13 Filed 08/31/05 Page 3 of 3