Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_13-cv-01292/USCOURTS-azd-2_13-cv-01292-1/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 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Ramon Manuel Rivera, 

Plaintiff, 

 vs. 

Detention Officer Brennan, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. CV 13-1292-PHX-RCB (JFM) 

 O R D E R 

 

Plaintiff Ramon Manuel Rivera, who is confined in the Maricopa County Lower 

Buckeye Jail, filed a pro se civil rights Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. In a 

September 26, 2013 Order, the Court directed Plaintiff to pay the $400.00 administrative 

and filing fees or file an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. On October 18, 

2013, Plaintiff filed an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. 4). The Court 

will order Defendant Brennan to answer Count One of the Complaint and will dismiss the 

remaining claim and Defendant without prejudice. 

I. Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis and Filing Fee

 Plaintiff’s 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. § 1915(b)(1). 

The Court will assess an initial partial filing fee of $15.22. 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 

Case 2:13-cv-01292-JJT-JFM Document 6 Filed 02/25/14 Page 1 of 7
- 2 - 

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 

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, thedefendant-unlawfully-harmed-me accusation.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 

(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 679. 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 681. 

 But as the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has instructed, 

courts must “continue to construe pro se filings liberally.” Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 

342 (9th Cir. 2010). A “complaint [filed by a pro se prisoner] ‘must be held to less 

Case 2:13-cv-01292-JJT-JFM Document 6 Filed 02/25/14 Page 2 of 7
- 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 

27 

28 

TERMPSREF 

stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers.’” Id. (quoting Erickson v. 

Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007) (per curiam)). 

III. Complaint 

 Plaintiff names Maricopa County Detention Officers Brennan and #2124 as 

Defendants in the Complaint. Plaintiff raises two claims for relief. 

 In Count One, Plaintiff claims his Fourteenth Amendment rights were violated 

when Defendant Brennan failed to protect him from an attack by another inmate. 

Plaintiff claims he is in protective custody because he is elderly and in a wheelchair. On 

January 6, 2013, Plaintiff was placed in the recreation yard for his “hour out” and notified 

Defendant Brennan that another inmate, who was also in the yard at the same time, had 

threatened Plaintiff’s life and appeared to be intoxicated and was displaying volatile 

behavior. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Brennan disregarded the warning and Plaintiff 

was subsequently assaulted. Plaintiff claims that Defendant Brennan also used mace on 

Plaintiff, rather than Plaintiff’s attacker. 

 In Count Two, Plaintiff claims his Fourteenth Amendment rights were violated 

when Defendant #2124 failed “to control the traffic between a violent subject and a 

vulnerable target, subjecting [Plaintiff] to risk of serious harm by an unreasonable 

protected observation.” Plaintiff alleges that Defendant #2124 allowed “free reign” in the 

jail and allowed Plaintiff’s attacker easy access to Plaintiff. 

 Plaintiff seeks money damages and injunctive relief. 

IV. Failure to State a Claim

 The Supreme Court has held that mere negligent failure to protect an inmate from 

another inmate is not actionable under § 1983. Davidson v. Cannon, 474 U.S. 344 

(1986). A prison official violates the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments in failing to 

protect one inmate from another only when two conditions are met. First, the alleged 

constitutional deprivation must be, objectively, “sufficiently serious;” the official’s act or 

omission must result in the denial of “the minimal civilized measure of life’s necessities.” 

Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 834 (1994). Second, the prison official must have a 

Case 2:13-cv-01292-JJT-JFM Document 6 Filed 02/25/14 Page 3 of 7
- 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 

27 

28 

TERMPSREF 

“sufficiently culpable state of mind,” i.e., he must act with deliberate indifference to 

inmate health or safety. Id. In defining “deliberate indifference” in this context, the 

Supreme Court has imposed a subjective test: 

the official must both be aware of the 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 839. 

 Plaintiff has not alleged facts sufficient to demonstrate Defendant #2124 acted 

with deliberate indifference; Plaintiff does not demonstrate that Defendant #2124 was 

aware of serious risk of harm to Plaintiff’s safety and failed to act. At most, Plaintiff’s 

facts suggest Defendant #2124 was negligent in controlling inmate movement. As noted 

above, negligence is not sufficient to support a claim for deliberate indifference. The 

Court will dismiss Count Two and Defendant #2124. 

V. Claims for Which an Answer Will be Required

 Liberally construed, Plaintiff has adequately stated a failure to protect claim 

against Defendant Brennan in Count One. The Court will require Defendant Brennan to 

answer Count One. 

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. 

Case 2:13-cv-01292-JJT-JFM Document 6 Filed 02/25/14 Page 4 of 7
- 5 - 

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 

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 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. 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 $15.22. 

(3) Count Two is dismissed without prejudice. 

 (4) Defendant #2124 is dismissed without prejudice. 

 (5) Defendant Brennan must answer Count One. 

 (6) 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 Brennan. 

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

within 21 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. 

 (8) 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 

Case 2:13-cv-01292-JJT-JFM Document 6 Filed 02/25/14 Page 5 of 7
- 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 

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). 

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

Complaint, and a copy of this Order for future use. 

 (10) 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 Defendants must include a copy of this 

Order. The Marshal must immediately file signed waivers of service of the 

summons. If a waiver of service of summons is returned as undeliverable or 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 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. 

 (11) 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.

Case 2:13-cv-01292-JJT-JFM Document 6 Filed 02/25/14 Page 6 of 7
- 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 

 (12) 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. 

 (13) This matter is referred to Magistrate Judge James F. Metcalf 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 25th day of February, 2014. 

Case 2:13-cv-01292-JJT-JFM Document 6 Filed 02/25/14 Page 7 of 7