Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cv-04756/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cv-04756-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MATTHEW MARK KOZLOWSKI,

Plaintiff,

v.

WILLIAM NICHOLAS HUNTING, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 15-cv-04756-KAW (PR)

ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT 

PREJUDICE

INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff Matthew Mark Kozlowski, a state prisoner incarcerated at Kern Valley State 

Prison, has filed a pro se civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that he was 

physically and mentally abused by his two step brothers and an ex-friend. Plaintiff has consented 

to the jurisdiction of the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge over this action. Plaintiff’s 

motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted in a separate order. The Court now 

reviews Plaintiff’s complaint.

DISCUSSION

I. Preliminary Review of Complaint

A federal court must conduct a preliminary screening in any case in which a prisoner seeks 

redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1915A(a). In its review, the court must identify any cognizable claims and dismiss any claims 

that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted or seek 

monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. Id. § 1915A(b)(1), (2). Pro se

pleadings must be liberally construed. Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep't, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th 

Cir. 1988).

Case 4:15-cv-04756-KAW Document 4 Filed 10/30/15 Page 1 of 2
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two essential elements: 

(1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and (2) that 

the alleged violation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law. West v. 

Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988).

II. Plaintiff’s Claim

In his complaint, Plaintiff alleges that the three Defendants caused him physical abuse 

throughout his childhood and, in 1999, the abuse left him with amnesia from bullets to his head, 

baseball bat beatings and cars running over him. Plaintiff was left for dead at Niles Creek so long 

that mice ate part of his brain. The Defendants also injected Plaintiff with chemicals to erase their 

crimes from his memory, but one year ago the memories started coming back. He also alleges that 

Defendants have “stolen” his life story and sold it to book and movie companies without his 

permission.

In order to state a federal civil rights claim, the defendants must have acted under color of 

state law. See 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Because Defendants are private individuals and are not state 

actors, Plaintiff cannot state any federal civil rights claims against them. Therefore, this complaint 

is dismissed. However, Plaintiff may be able to assert state claims against Defendants in state 

court.

CONCLUSION

The complaint is dismissed without prejudice. If Plaintiff wishes to, he may file state 

claims against Defendants in state court. The Clerk shall enter a separate judgment and close this 

case. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:

______________________________________

KANDIS A. WESTMORE

United States Magistrate Judge

10/30/15

Case 4:15-cv-04756-KAW Document 4 Filed 10/30/15 Page 2 of 2