Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_07-cv-02451/USCOURTS-azd-2_07-cv-02451-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
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

TERMPSREF

WO MDR

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Ernie Pete Ortega, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Dora B. Schriro, et al., 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 07-2451-PHX-MHM (JCG)

ORDER

On December 3, 2007, Plaintiff Ernie Pete Ortega, who is confined in the Arizona

State Prison Complex-Eyman in Florence, Arizona, filed a pro se civil rights Complaint

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Doc. #1) and an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis.

In a December 14, 2007 Order (Doc. #3), the Court denied the Application to Proceed

because it was incomplete. The Court gave Plaintiff 30 days to file a complete Application

to Proceed.

On January 15, 2008, Plaintiff filed a second Application to Proceed In Forma

Pauperis (Doc. #4). The Court will grant the second Application to Proceed, will order

Defendant Hewitt to answer Count Two of the Complaint, and will dismiss the remaining

claims and Defendants without prejudice. 

I. Second Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis and Filing Fee

Plaintiff’s second Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis will be granted. 28

U.S.C. § 1915(a). Plaintiff must pay the statutory filing fee of $350.00. 28 U.S.C.

Case 2:07-cv-02451-JWS Document 6 Filed 01/28/08 Page 1 of 6
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

TERMPSREF - 2 -

§ 1915(b)(1). The Court will assess an initial partial filing fee of $0.57. The remainder of

the fee will be collected monthly in payments of 20% of the previous month’s income each

time the amount in the account exceeds $10.00. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2). The Court will

enter a separate Order requiring the appropriate government agency to collect and forward

the fees according to the statutory formula. 

II. 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

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). 

III. Complaint

In his three-count Complaint, Plaintiff sues Defendants Arizona Department of

Corrections Director Dora B. Schriro, Corrections Officer III E. Hewitt, and John Doe

Corrections Officers.

In Count One, Plaintiff alleges he has been denied his Fourteenth Amendment right

of access to the courts because his property, including his legal files in an ongoing state-court

appeal, were lost during his transfer between units. 

In Count Two, Plaintiff asserts that Defendant Hewitt violated Plaintiff’s Fourteenth

Amendment rights and retaliated against him. Specifically, Plaintiff contends that Defendant

Hewitt purposely denied a grievance and then refused to provide Risk Management forms

to Plaintiff even after the deputy warden (1) found in Plaintiff’s favor on appeal of the denial

of the grievance and (2) informed Plaintiff that Defendant Hewitt would provide Plaintiff

with the Risk Management forms.

In Count Three, Plaintiff alleges a violation of his Fourteenth Amendment rights. He

states that Arizona Department of Corrections staff reclassified him without his knowledge,

the reclassifications were approved by Defendant Schriro, and Plaintiff was not afforded his

Case 2:07-cv-02451-JWS Document 6 Filed 01/28/08 Page 2 of 6
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

TERMPSREF - 3 -

right to be present or his right to appeal the reclassification orders pursuant to Arizona

Department of Corrections’ policy.

In his Request for Relief, Plaintiff seeks monetary damages, a transfer to a level 3

yard, the removal of Defendant Hewitt from “the CO III position,” and a ban on Defendant

Hewitt participating in the grievance system.

IV. Failure to State a Claim – Counts One and Three

In Count One, Plaintiff has failed to state a claim for the denial of his access to the

courts because he has alleged nothing more than the negligent misplacement of his property.

See Daniels v. Williams, 474 U.S. 327, 328 (1986) (“[T]he Due Process Clause [of the

Fourteenth Amendment] is simply not implicated by a negligent act of an official causing

unintended loss of or injury to life, liberty, or property.”) (emphasis in original); see also

Simkins v. Bruce, 406 F.3d 1239, 1242 (10th Cir. 2005) (“[P]laintiff’s claim that a right of

access to the courts has been impeded requires him to allege intentional conduct . . . . By

contrast, when access to courts is impeded by mere negligence, as when legal mail is

inadvertently lost or misdirected, no constitutional violation occurs.”) (footnote and citations

omitted); Pink v. Lester, 52 F.3d 73, 78 (4th Cir.1995) (“Daniels bars an action under § 1983

for negligent conduct that results in a denial of access to the courts.”)

In Count Three, Plaintiff has also failed to state a claim because a prisoner has no

constitutional right to enjoy a particular security classification. See Meachum v. Fano, 427

U.S. 215, 224-25 (1976); Meachum v. Terhune, 476 F.3d 716, 178 (9th Cir.) (classification

in level 4 prison rather than level 3 prison did not present an atypical and significant

hardship), cert. denied, 128 S. Ct. 396 (2007). In addition, there is “no legitimate claim of

entitlement to a grievance procedure.” Mann v. Adams, 855 F.2d 639, 640 (9th Cir. 1988).

Therefore, the Court will dismiss Counts One and Three and Defendants Schriro and John

Doe Corrections Officers.

V. Claim for Which an Answer Will be Required

Liberally construed, Plaintiff has stated a claim against Defendant Hewitt in Count

Two, and the Court will require Defendant Hewitt to answer Count Two of the Complaint.

Case 2:07-cv-02451-JWS Document 6 Filed 01/28/08 Page 3 of 6
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

TERMPSREF - 4 -

VI. 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 serve Defendant, or counsel if an appearance has been entered, a copy

of every document that he files. Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(a). Each filing must include a certificate

stating that a copy of the filing was served. Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(d). Also, 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 v. Bonzelet,

963 F.2d 1258, 1260-61 (9th Cir. 1992) (a district court may dismiss an action for failure to

comply with any order of the Court).

IT IS ORDERED: 

(1) Plaintiff’s second Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. #4) is

granted. 

(2) As required by the accompanying Order to the appropriate government agency,

Plaintiff must pay the $350.00 filing fee and is assessed an initial partial filing fee of $0.57.

Case 2:07-cv-02451-JWS Document 6 Filed 01/28/08 Page 4 of 6
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

TERMPSREF - 5 -

(3) Counts One and Three and Defendants Schriro and John Doe Corrections

Officers are dismissed without prejudice.

(4) Defendant Hewitt must answer Count Two.

(5) The Clerk of Court must send Plaintiff a service packet including the

Complaint (Doc. #1), this Order, and both summons and request for waiver forms for

Defendant Hewitt.

(6) Plaintiff must complete and return the service packet to the Clerk of Court

within 20 days of the date of filing of this Order. The United States Marshal will not provide

service of process if Plaintiff fails to comply with this Order.

(7) If Plaintiff does not either obtain a waiver of service of the summons or

complete service of the Summons and Complaint on Defendant within 120 days of the filing

of the Complaint or within 60 days of the filing of this Order, whichever is later, the action

may be dismissed. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m); LRCiv 16.2(b)(2)(B)(i).

(8) The United States Marshal must retain the Summons, a copy of the Complaint,

and a copy of this Order for future use.

(9) The United States Marshal must notify Defendant of the commencement of this

action and request waiver of service of the summons pursuant to Rule 4(d) of the Federal

Rules of Civil Procedure. The notice to Defendant must include a copy of this Order. The

Marshal must immediately file requests for waivers that were returned as undeliverable and

waivers of service of the summons. If a waiver of service of summons is not returned by

Defendant within 30 days from the date the request for waiver was sent by the Marshal, the

Marshal must:

(a) personally serve copies of the Summons, Complaint, and this Order upon

Defendant pursuant to Rule 4(e)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; and

(b) within 10 days after personal service is effected, file the return of service

for Defendant, along with evidence of the attempt to secure a waiver of service of the

summons and of the costs subsequently incurred in effecting service upon Defendant.

The costs of service must be enumerated on the return of service form (USM-285) and

Case 2:07-cv-02451-JWS Document 6 Filed 01/28/08 Page 5 of 6
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

TERMPSREF - 6 -

must include the costs incurred by the Marshal for photocopying additional copies of

the Summons, Complaint, or this Order and for preparing new process receipt and

return forms (USM-285), if required. Costs of service will be taxed against the

personally served Defendant pursuant to Rule 4(d)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure, unless otherwise ordered by the Court.

(10) If Defendant agrees to waive service of the Summons and Complaint,

Defendant must return the signed waiver forms to the United States Marshal, not the

Plaintiff.

(11) Defendant must answer the Complaint or otherwise respond by appropriate

motion within the time provided by the applicable provisions of Rule 12(a) of the Federal

Rules of Civil Procedure.

(12) This matter is referred to Magistrate Judge Jennifer C. Guerin pursuant to Rules

72.1 and 72.2 of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure for further proceedings.

DATED this 25th day of January, 2008.

Case 2:07-cv-02451-JWS Document 6 Filed 01/28/08 Page 6 of 6