Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_13-cv-00879/USCOURTS-caed-2_13-cv-00879-3/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

ALONZO JAMES JOSEPH, No. 2:13-CV-0879-CMK-P

Plaintiff, 

vs. ORDER

S. HEATLEY, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 

42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff has consented to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 636(c) and no other party has been served or appeared in the action. Pending before the court

is plaintiff’s complaint (Doc. 1).

The court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief

against a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. See 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915A(a). The court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if it: (1) is frivolous or

malicious; (2) fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted; or (3) seeks monetary relief

from a defendant who is immune from such relief. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1), (2). Moreover,

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure require that complaints contain a “. . . short and plain

1

Case 2:13-cv-00879-CMK Document 12 Filed 09/22/16 Page 1 of 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

statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). 

This means that claims must be stated simply, concisely, and directly. See McHenry v. Renne,

84 F.3d 1172, 1177 (9th Cir. 1996) (referring to Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(e)(1)). These rules are satisfied

if the complaint gives the defendant fair notice of the plaintiff’s claim and the grounds upon

which it rests. See Kimes v. Stone, 84 F.3d 1121, 1129 (9th Cir. 1996). Because plaintiff must

allege with at least some degree of particularity overt acts by specific defendants which support

the claims, vague and conclusory allegations fail to satisfy this standard. Additionally, it is

impossible for the court to conduct the screening required by law when the allegations are vague

and conclusory. 

I. PLAINTIFF’S ALLEGATIONS

Plaintiff names the following defendants: S. Heatley; S. Johnson; M. Brady; and

L.D. Zamora. Plaintiff alleges:

On 7-3-2012, inmate Garza. . . was discovered to have spinal meningitis, a

virus known to kill if you don’t detect it in time. The housing building

was suppose to be quarantine to that the virus won’t get spreaded, and that

won’t nobody be subjected to catching the virus, while apparently a couple

of other people had caught the “bacteria” of the meningitis, because those

couple of inmates had the same symptoms. Epidemics of meningococcal

meningitis may occur in such environments as other small groups of

people in close contact. The medical department had a obligation to make

sure that us inmates be protected from catching the virus. They failed to

activate the quarantine, when they first became aware of the spinal

meningitis. It shouldn’t have to be infected to be compensated, it’s the

fact that the medical department was negligent on there part, for not

activating the quarantine, allowing me to be in danger of this deadly

disease. They failed to follow there own procedures and guidelines. 

Plaintiff does not allege that he ever contracted meningitis.

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

2

Case 2:13-cv-00879-CMK Document 12 Filed 09/22/16 Page 2 of 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

Plaintiff outlines the following timeline of events relating to the prison grievance

process:

October 4, 2012 Plaintiff filed an inmate grievance stating that his

health and welfare was being put in danger by the

prison medical department.

October 9, 2012 Defendant S. Johnson interviewed plaintiff and

denied his grievance.

October 18, 2012 Defendant M. Brady upheld defendant S. Johnson’s

denial.

October 19, 2012 Plaintiff filed a “Dissatisfied Response” to

defendant M. Brady’s decision.

November 9, 2012 Defendant S. Heatley denied plaintiff’s inmate

grievance.

November 15, 2012 Plaintiff filed a “Dissatisfied Response” to

defendant S. Heatley’s decision. 

April 23, 2013 Defendant L.D. Zamora denied plaintiff’s

grievance.

Plaintiff claims that, as a prison nurse, defendant S. Johnson is responsible for the

health and welfare of all inmates. He claims that defendant M. Brady, as the supervising prison

nurse, is responsible for the other nurses’ conduct. He claims that defendant S. Heatley, as the

chief prison physician, is responsible for all medical decisions at the prison. Plaintiff claims that

defendant L.D. Zamora, as the chief appeals coordinator is liable by virtue of his handling of

plaintiff’s inmate grievances. 

Plaintiff attaches to his complaint the various responses to his inmate grievances. 

In the first level response dated October 18, 2012, defendant M. Brady states:

During the first level interview, PHN, Johnson explained although she

could not talk about Mr. Garza’s medical status with you, she did tell you

that there are many types of spinal meningitis and that viral and other types

of meningitis are not as serious as bacterial meningitis, are not known to

kill, and quarantine is not recommended per the Centers for Disease

Control (CDC) handouts PHN, Johnson provided to you. PHN, Johnson

explained that although it is true that bacterial meningococcal meningitis

can occur in such environments, we have had no cases of bacterial

meningococcal meningitis at Mule Creek State Prison (MCSP) since she

3

Case 2:13-cv-00879-CMK Document 12 Filed 09/22/16 Page 3 of 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

has been the PHN here and we do not have any now. PHN, Johnson

explained that no quarantine was indicated in this case and encouraged you

to read the CDC handouts provided to you on viral meningitis and

bacterial meningitis. 

II. DISCUSSION

Plaintiff claims that defendants are liable for putting his health at risk. The

treatment a prisoner receives in prison and the conditions under which the prisoner is confined

are subject to scrutiny under the Eighth Amendment, which prohibits cruel and unusual

punishment. See Helling v. McKinney, 509 U.S. 25, 31 (1993); Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S.

825, 832 (1994). The Eighth Amendment “. . . embodies broad and idealistic concepts of

dignity, civilized standards, humanity, and decency.” Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 102

(1976). Conditions of confinement may, however, be harsh and restrictive. See Rhodes v.

Chapman, 452 U.S. 337, 347 (1981). Nonetheless, prison officials must provide prisoners with

“food, clothing, shelter, sanitation, medical care, and personal safety.” Toussaint v. McCarthy,

801 F.2d 1080, 1107 (9th Cir. 1986). A prison official violates the Eighth Amendment only

when two requirements are met: (1) objectively, the official’s act or omission must be so serious

such that it results in the denial of the minimal civilized measure of life’s necessities; and (2)

subjectively, the prison official must have acted unnecessarily and wantonly for the purpose of

inflicting harm. See Farmer, 511 U.S. at 834. Thus, to violate the Eighth Amendment, a prison

official must have a “sufficiently culpable mind.” See id. 

Under these principles, prison officials have a duty to take reasonable steps to

protect inmates from harm. See Hoptowit v. Ray, 682 F.2d 1237, 1250-51 (9th Cir. 1982);

Farmer, 511 U.S. at 833. Liability exists only when two requirements are met: (1) objectively,

the prisoner was incarcerated under conditions presenting a substantial risk of serious harm; and

(2) subjectively, prison officials knew of and disregarded the risk. See Farmer, 511 U.S. at 837. 

The very obviousness of the risk may suffice to establish the knowledge element. See Wallis v.

4

Case 2:13-cv-00879-CMK Document 12 Filed 09/22/16 Page 4 of 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

Baldwin, 70 F.3d 1074, 1077 (9th Cir. 1995). Prison officials are not liable, however, if

evidence is presented that they lacked knowledge of a safety risk. See Farmer, 511 U.S. at 844. 

The knowledge element does not require that the plaintiff prove that prison officials know for a

certainty that the inmate’s safety is in danger, but it requires proof of more than a mere suspicion

of danger. See Berg v. Kincheloe, 794 F.2d 457, 459 (9th Cir. 1986). Finally, the plaintiff must

show that prison officials disregarded a risk. Thus, where prison officials actually knew of a

substantial risk, they are not liable if they took reasonable steps to respond to the risk, even if

harm ultimately was not averted. See Farmer, 511 U.S. at 844. 

On the facts alleged in the complaint, plaintiff cannot state a claim. Specifically,

as indicated in the October 18, 2012, first level response to plaintiff’s inmate grievance, which

plaintiff attaches to and references in his complaint, no quarantine was required because bacterial

meningitis was not present. Thus, plaintiff cannot establish the subjective element of his claim –

that he was housed under conditions which presented a substantial risk of serious harm. 

III. CONCLUSION

Because it does not appear possible that the deficiencies identified herein can be

cured by amending the complaint, plaintiff is not entitled to leave to amend prior to dismissal of

the entire action. See Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1126, 1131 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc). 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. This action is dismissed for failure to state a claim; and

2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment and close this file. 

DATED: September 22, 2016

______________________________________

CRAIG M. KELLISON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

5

Case 2:13-cv-00879-CMK Document 12 Filed 09/22/16 Page 5 of 5