Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01577/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01577-9/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

 Plaintiff also has filed an “objection and denial” to the reply. Because the rules of 1

procedure do not provide for such a filing, and plaintiff did not seek for its filing, the court has

disregarded it.

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DAVID W. WILSON,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-06-1577 FCD KJM P

vs.

L. M. ZAFRA, et al., ORDER AND

Defendants. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Plaintiff is a California prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with an

action for violation of civil rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The action was filed July 17, 2006,

and currently is proceeding against defendant Zafra (defendant) with respect to plaintiff’s claim

that defendant denied plaintiff medical care in violation of the Eighth Amendment. See

November 2, 2007 Order. Defendant’s motion to dismiss is before the court. Plaintiff has filed

an opposition and defendant a reply. 

1

Defendant asserts that this action should be dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). 

Under that statute, an inmate cannot bring an action in forma pauperis if, on three prior occasions

Case 2:06-cv-01577-FCD-KJM Document 42 Filed 09/19/08 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

 Page references are to those plaintiff has assigned himself, in handwritten form at the 2

bottom of the page.

2

and while incarcerated, he or she brought actions in federal court that were dismissed as

frivolous, malicious or for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The

information presented by defendant indicates that, at most, plaintiff has one case that qualifies as

a “strike” under § 1915(g). Def’t’s Request for Judicial Notice (Docket Entry #23), Ex. A

(dismissal of Central District of California case as “legally and/or factually frivolous,” filed on

February 26, 2003). The other cases identified by defendant had not yet been dismissed before

this action was filed. Id., Exs. B, C, D & E (dismissals on 10/31/06, 6/1/07, 11/11/06, and

3/8/07, respectively). Therefore, plaintiff was not precluded from bringing this action under the

in forma pauperis statute when he did so. 

Defendant also asserts this action should be dismissed for failure to state a claim

upon which relief can be granted. In considering a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim

upon which relief can be granted, the court must accept as true the allegations of the complaint in

question, Erickson v. Pardus, ___ U.S. ___, 127 S. Ct. 2197, 2200 (2007), and construe the

pleading in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 236

(1974). In order to survive dismissal for failure to state a claim a complaint must contain more

than “a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action;” it must contain factual

allegations sufficient “to raise a right to relief above the speculative level.” Bell Atlantic Corp. v.

Twombly, ___ U.S. ___, 127 S. Ct. 1955, 1965 (2007). However, “[s]pecific facts are not

necessary; the statement [of facts] need only give the defendant fair notice of what the claim is

and the grounds upon which it rests.” Erickson, 127 S. Ct. 2197 at 2200. 

In his amended complaint, plaintiff asserts that on January 2, 2005 he requested

that defendant, a nurse at plaintiff’s place of incarceration, help plaintiff speak to a doctor so that

he could obtain “psychological medication.” Am. Compl. at 8. Defendant refused to help 2

Case 2:06-cv-01577-FCD-KJM Document 42 Filed 09/19/08 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

 While plaintiff also alleges that defendant then prepared a rules violation report naming 3

plaintiff and that her actions constituted retaliation, Am. Compl. at 8-9, the court did not order

service of any retaliation claim. Cf. Robinson v. Rhodes, 408 F.3d 559, 567-68 (9th Cir. 2005). 

3

plaintiff. Id.3

The Eighth Amendment’s prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment extends to

medical care of prison inmates. Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 104-05 (1976). In order to state

a section 1983 claim for violation of the Eighth Amendment based on inadequate medical care, a

prison inmate must allege “acts or omissions sufficiently harmful to evidence deliberate

indifference to serious medical needs.” Id. at 106. 

Defendant asserts she is entitled to dismissal because plaintiff has not pled a

sufficiently serious deprivation of medical care or alleged that defendant was deliberately

indifferent to plaintiff’s condition. Plaintiff does not articulate in his amended complaint why he

was in need of “psychological medication,” and whether defendant was in a position to do

anything to treat plaintiff’s condition. In the face of defendant’s motion, plaintiff fails to point to

anything in his opposition suggesting plaintiff could state an Eighth Amendment claim if he were

granted leave to further amend.

For these reasons, the court will recommend that defendant’s motion to dismiss be

granted. The court thus does not to reach the other arguments in favor of dismissal raised by

defendant.

The court notes that both plaintiff and defendant have filed requests that the court

take judicial notice of certain documents. Defendant’s request applies to the five, other cases

provided in support of the motion to dismiss. See Docket No. 23, Exs. A-E. Plaintiff’s request

applies to four of these five cases. See Docket No. 29. A court may take judicial notice of court

records. See, e.g., Bennett v. Medtronic, Inc., 285 F.3d 801, 803 n.2 (9th Cir. 2002) ( “[W]e

‘may take notice of proceedings in other courts, both within and without the federal judicial

/////

Case 2:06-cv-01577-FCD-KJM Document 42 Filed 09/19/08 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

4

system, if those proceedings have a direct relation to matters at issue’”). Both parties’ requests

for judicial notice will be granted. 

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

1. Defendant’s request for judicial notice (#23) is granted; and

2. Plaintiff’s request for judicial notice (#29) is granted.

IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that:

1. Defendant’s motion to dismiss (#22) be granted; and 

2. This action be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be

granted.

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty

days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written

objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 

“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any reply to the objections

shall be served and filed within ten days after service of the objections. The parties are advised

that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District

Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 

DATED: September 19, 2008.

1

wils1577.57

Case 2:06-cv-01577-FCD-KJM Document 42 Filed 09/19/08 Page 4 of 4