Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-02142/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-02142-2/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOHN DONALD KELSO, 

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-09-2142 MCE KJM P

vs.

SANDOVAL, et al., 

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff is a civil committee currently held in Solano County Jail proceeding pro

se with a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On January 20, 2010, the court dismissed

the complaint and gave plaintiff the opportunity to file an amended complaint. The amended

complaint is now before the court.

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 monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28

U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1),(2). 

/////

1

Case 2:09-cv-02142-MCE -KJM Document 15 Filed 04/07/10 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

A claim is legally frivolous when it lacks an arguable basis either in law or in

fact. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989); Franklin v. Murphy, 745 F.2d 1221, 1227-

28 (9th Cir. 1984). The court may, therefore, dismiss a claim as frivolous where it is based on an

indisputably meritless legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. 

Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 327. The critical inquiry is whether a constitutional claim, however

inartfully pleaded, has an arguable legal and factual basis. See Jackson v. Arizona, 885 F.2d

639, 640 (9th Cir. 1989); Franklin, 745 F.2d at 1227.

In order to avoid dismissal for failure to state a claim a complaint must contain

more than “naked assertions,” “labels and conclusions” or “a formulaic recitation of the elements

of a cause of action.” Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555-57 (2007). In other

words, “[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory

statements do not suffice.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009). Furthermore, a

claim upon which the court can grant relief has facial plausibility. Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570. 

“A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to

draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.” Iqbal, 129

S. Ct. at 1949. When considering whether a complaint states a claim upon which relief can be

granted, the court must accept the allegations as true, Erickson v. Pardus, 127 S. Ct. 2197, 2200

(2007), and construe the complaint in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, see Scheuer v.

Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 236 (1974). 

The court finds the allegations in plaintiff’s amended complaint so vague and

conclusory that the complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Plaintiff

alleges that he is “on a one on one. One nurse with me at all times.” He seeks placement in “a

protective custody unit for civilian commitments like myself.” He does not allege, however that

he is being held with inmates charged with crimes, which might state a claim, or even make clear

whether his claims relate to his housing in Patton State Hospital, which is in the Central District

of California, or in the Solano County Jail, which is in this district. 

2

Case 2:09-cv-02142-MCE -KJM Document 15 Filed 04/07/10 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

Although the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 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 defendants engaged in that support plaintiff’s

claim. Id. Plaintiff’s complaint must be dismissed. The court will, however, grant leave to file

an amended complaint.

If plaintiff chooses to amend the complaint, plaintiff must demonstrate 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). Also, 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). Furthermore, vague and conclusory

allegations of official participation in civil rights violations are not sufficient. Ivey v. Board of

Regents, 673 F.2d 266, 268 (9th Cir. 1982).

In addition, plaintiff is informed that the court cannot refer to a prior pleading in

order to make plaintiff’s amended complaint complete. Local Rule 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 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. 

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s amended complaint is dismissed. 

2. Plaintiff is granted thirty days from the date of service of this order to file a

second amended complaint that complies with the requirements of the Civil Rights Act, the

3

Case 2:09-cv-02142-MCE -KJM Document 15 Filed 04/07/10 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

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and the Local Rules of Practice; the amended complaint must

bear the docket number assigned this case and must be labeled “Amended Complaint”; failure to

file a second amended complaint in accordance with this order will result in a recommendation

that this action be dismissed.

3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send plaintiff the form for a civil rights

action. 

DATED: April 6, 2010. 

2

kels2142.14amd

4

Case 2:09-cv-02142-MCE -KJM Document 15 Filed 04/07/10 Page 4 of 4