Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_10-cv-00982/USCOURTS-cand-3_10-cv-00982-0/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

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SATURNINO PRADO, 

Plaintiff,

 vs.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT

COURT, NORTHERN DISTRICT

OF CALIFORNIA, 

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 10-0982 JSW (PR)

ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT

WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND

GRANTING LEAVE TO PROCEED

IN FORMA PAUPERIS 

(Docket no. 2)

INTRODUCTION

Petitioner, currently incarcerated by the State of California at California State

Prison Sacramento, has filed a pro se civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

Petitioner seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis (docket no. 2). This order dismisses

the petition. Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis GRANTED in a

separate order filed simultaneously.

DISCUSSION

Plaintiff’s amended complaint challenges Plaintiff’s conviction in front of Los

Angeles County Superior Court Judge Alice Altoon. Plaintiff asserts in his complaint for

relief that he was not guilty of the crime, but was convicted and is serving a 14 year

sentence. Plaintiff has previously filed multiple similar civil rights actions in this Court,

which have been dismissed by this Court for the same reasons set forth herein, as well as

multiple habeas petitions, which were transferred to the proper venue.

Case 3:10-cv-00982-JSW Document 9 Filed 06/21/10 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

27

28 2

A. Standard of Review

Federal courts must engage in a preliminary screening of cases in which prisoners

seek redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 

See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). In its review the court must identify any cognizable claims,

and dismiss any claims which 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. See id. at 1915A(b)(1),(2). Pro se pleadings must be liberally construed. See

Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep't, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1990).

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

elements: (1) that a violation of a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United

States was violated, and (2) that the alleged deprivation was committed by a person

acting under the color of state law. See West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988).

B. Legal Claim

In this case, Petitioner has improperly filed his claim as a civil rights action. A

district court may construe a habeas petition by a prisoner attacking the conditions of his

confinement as a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Wilwording v. Swenson,

404 U.S. 249, 251 (1971). The opposite is not true, however: a civil rights complaint

seeking habeas relief should be dismissed without prejudice to bringing it as a petition

for writ of habeas corpus. Trimble v. City of Santa Rosa, 49 F.3d 583, 586 (9th Cir.

1995).

Any claim by a prisoner attacking the validity or duration of his confinement must

be brought under the habeas sections of Title 28 of the United States Code. Calderon v.

Ashmus, 523 U.S. 740, 747 (1998); Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 500 (1973). A

prisoner must bring a habeas petition if the nature of his claim is such that it would

necessarily imply the invalidity of his conviction or continuing confinement. Bogovich

v. Sandoval, 189 F.3d 999, 1002 (9th Cir. 1999) (ADA claim); Butterfield v. Bail, 120

Case 3:10-cv-00982-JSW Document 9 Filed 06/21/10 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

27

28 3

F.3d 1023, 1024 (9th Cir. 1997) (§ 1983 claim). In this case, Plaintiff’s claims attack the

validity of his confinement and are such that they necessarily imply the invalidity of his

continuing confinement. As such, the complaint fails to state a claim for relief and is

DISMISSED without prejudice. 

CONCLUSION 

Based on the foregoing, this action is DISMISSED. The Clerk of Court shall

close the file and enter judgment in accordance with this order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: June 21, 2010

 JEFFREY S. WHITE

United States District Judge

Case 3:10-cv-00982-JSW Document 9 Filed 06/21/10 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

27

28 4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SATURNINO PRADO,

Plaintiff,

 v.

US DISTRICT COURT et al,

Defendant. /

Case Number: CV10-00982 JSW 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District

Court, Northern District of California.

That on June 21, 2010, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing said

copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by depositing

said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery

receptacle located in the Clerk's office.

Saturnino Prado

P.O. Box 290066 

 #P-98312

Represa, CA 95671

Dated: June 21, 2010

Richard W. Wieking, Clerk

By: Jennifer Ottolini, Deputy Clerk

Case 3:10-cv-00982-JSW Document 9 Filed 06/21/10 Page 4 of 4