Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_09-cv-02261/USCOURTS-azd-2_09-cv-02261-0/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

TERMPSREF 28

WO RP

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Philip Atem, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Brandt, et al., 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 09-2261-PHX-MHM (LOA)

ORDER

Plaintiff Philip Atem, who is confined in the Maricopa County Lower Buckeye Jail,

has filed a pro se civil rights Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Doc. #1) and an

Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. #3). The Court will order Defendants to

answer Count I of the Complaint and will dismiss Count II for failure to state a claim upon

which relief may be granted. 

I. Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis and Filing Fee

Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. #3) will be granted. 28

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

§ 1915(b)(1). The Court will assess an initial partial filing fee of $42.50. 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

Case 2:09-cv-02261-MHM Document 4 Filed 02/25/10 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

TERMPSREF - 2 -

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). 

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.

III. Complaint

Named as Defendants in the Complaint are: (1) Brandt, Sergeant, Maricopa County

Sheriff’s Office; and (2) Berndtsen, Detention Officer, Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office.

Case 2:09-cv-02261-MHM Document 4 Filed 02/25/10 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

TERMPSREF - 3 -

Plaintiff alleges two counts in the Complaint. In both counts, Plaintiff claims that his

Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights have been violated. Plaintiff seeks a jury trial,

declaratory relief, attorney fees, court costs, and compensatory, punitive, and treble monetary

damages.

IV. Discussion

A. Count I

In Count I, Plaintiff claim that his Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights were

violated at the Maricopa County Towers Jail when Defendants Sergeant Brandt and Officer

Berndtsen came into his cell, while he was wrapped-up in his blanket with his hands and

arms at his side, and “grabbed” him and “dropped” him on the concrete floor. Plaintiff

alleges that one of the officers then sat on Plaintiff’s shoulders, using both of his knees to pin

both of Plaintiff’s shoulders, while the other officer sat on Plaintiff’s waist and legs. Plaintiff

also alleges that when he tried to scream “you[’re] choking me,” he was “struck” in the

mouth by an officer, causing a bruised and “bloody” lip. Plaintiff asserts that, as a result of

excessive force used by the Defendants, he suffered bruising, bleeding, and neck injuries.

Liberally construed, Plaintiff has stated an excessive force claim on Count I.

Accordingly, the Court will required Defendants Brandt and Berndtsen to answer Count I.

B. Count II

In Count II, Plaintiff claims that his Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights were

violated by Defendant Brandt when he “acted aggressively towards [Plaintiff] IE: ‘rough

handling[,’] snide remarks” after the incident in Count I. 

A pretrial detainee’s claim for unconstitutional conditions of confinement arises from

the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment rather than from the Eighth

Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. Bell v. Wolfish, 441 U.S.

520 (1979). Nevertheless, the Eighth Amendment provides a minimum standard of care for

determining a plaintiff’s rights as a pretrial detainee. Anderson v. Kern, 45 F.3d 1310, 1312-

313 (9th Cir. 1995) (citing Redman v. County of San Diego, 942 F.2d 1435, 1442 (9th Cir.

1991)).

Case 2:09-cv-02261-MHM Document 4 Filed 02/25/10 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

TERMPSREF - 4 -

 The specific inquiry with respect to pretrial detainees is whether the prison conditions

amount to “punishment” without due process in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Bell, 441 U.S. at 535. To comply with the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel

and unusual punishment, a prison must provide prisoners with “adequate food, clothing,

shelter, sanitation, medical care, and personal safety.” Hoptowit v. Ray, 682 F.2d 1237, 1246

(9th Cir. 1982). However, this does not mean that federal courts can, or should, interfere

whenever prisoners are inconvenienced or suffer de minimis injuries. See Bell, 441 U.S. at

539 n.21 (noting that a de minimis level of imposition does not rise to a constitutional

violation).

The actions that Plaintiff complains about in Count II do not rise to the level of

constitutional violations. Plaintiff alleges that his injuries consisted of being “pushed around,

left in court holding cell where inmates wait for train, court []chain[]s excessively tight,

remarks from detention officers.” These injuries are de minimis. Accordingly, Count II will

be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.

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 serve Defendants, 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

Case 2:09-cv-02261-MHM Document 4 Filed 02/25/10 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

TERMPSREF - 5 -

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 Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. #3) 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 $42.50.

(3) Count II of the Complaint is dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which

relief may be granted.

(4) Defendants Brandt and Berndtsen must answer Count I of the Complaint.

(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

Defendants Brandt and Berndtsen.

(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 a 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 as to each Defendant not served. 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.

Case 2:09-cv-02261-MHM Document 4 Filed 02/25/10 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

TERMPSREF - 6 -

(9) The United States Marshal must notify Defendants Brandt and Berndtsen 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 Defendants 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 a 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

the 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

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) A Defendant who agrees to waive service of the Summons and Complaint

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

(11) Defendants must answer Count I of 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) Any answer or response must state the specific Defendant by name on whose

behalf it is filed. The Court may strike any answer, response, or other motion or paper that

does not identify the specific Defendant by name on whose behalf it is filed.

Case 2:09-cv-02261-MHM Document 4 Filed 02/25/10 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

TERMPSREF - 7 -

(13) This matter is referred to Magistrate Judge Lawrence O. Anderson pursuant

to Rules 72.1 and 72.2 of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure for all pretrial proceedings as

authorized under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

DATED this 21st day of February, 2010.

Case 2:09-cv-02261-MHM Document 4 Filed 02/25/10 Page 7 of 7