Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_05-cv-01718/USCOURTS-cand-5_05-cv-01718-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

Order of Dismissal

N:\Pro - Se\12.20.2007\05-01718 Cook1718_dismissal.frm

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL COOK,

Plaintiff,

 vs.

DAVID WIEDNER, et al., 

Defendant(s).

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 05-01718 JW (PR)

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

(Docket Nos. 11, 12 & 13) 

Plaintiff filed a pro se complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against personnel at

the Maguire Correctional Facility in Redwood City, California. Plaintiff alleged that

defendant Wiedner verbally assaulted him, punched him in his back, and pushed him

against a wall. Plaintiff also alleged that defendant Floress verbally harassed him,

and that defendant Moody pushed him against a wall. Plaintiff’s last claim was that

he was placed in an unsanitary holding tank. 

On August 29, 2006, the Court dismissed the complaint with leave to amend. 

The Court found that plaintiff’s allegations of verbal harassment and excessive force

were too conclusory for the Court to determine whether defendants’ conduct rose to

the level of a constitutional violation. See Docket No. 9 at 4. The Court also found

that plaintiff’s claim that he was placed in an unsanitary holding tank was deficient

Case 5:05-cv-01718-JW Document 16 Filed 12/20/07 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

Order of Dismissal

N:\Pro - Se\12.20.2007\05-01718 Cook1718_dismissal.frm 2

because he failed to specify the length of time for which he was placed in the tank;

the length of time is significant in determining whether the alleged deprivation was

sufficiently serious to rise to the level of a constitutional violation. See id. at 5. 

Accordingly, the Court granted plaintiff thirty days to file an amended complaint to

cure the deficiencies in the original complaint. On September 20, 2006, plaintiff

filed a request for an extension of time to file an amended complaint. The Court

grants the request for an extension of time (Docket No. 11). The amended complaint

is deemed timely filed and is now before the Court for screening pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 1915A(a). 

In his amended complaint, which consists of two pages, plaintiff has failed to

set forth sufficient facts to support any of his claims against each defendant for

alleged constitutional deprivations. Plaintiff merely repeats the statements from his

original complaint that he was physically assaulted by defendant Wiedner and that

the conduct was wanton. In support of this allegation, plaintiff claims that an

affidavit by a witness was mailed to the Court. However, the Court has no record of

receiving such a document in this case. Plaintiff also repeats his claims that

defendants harassed and threatened him, and that they possessed a “sufficiently

culpable state of mind.” In short, the amended complaint contains nothing more

than the same conclusory allegations from the original complaint. Furthermore,

plaintiff failed to provide the deficient information with respect to his claim of being

held in an unsanitary holding cell. Accordingly, plaintiff’s complaint is

DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to state a cognizable claim under § 1983. 

In light of the dismissal, all motions (Docket Nos. 12 and 13) are DENIED as

moot. This order terminates Docket Nos. 11, 12 and 13.

DATED: December 20, 2007 

JAMES WARE

United States District Judge

Case 5:05-cv-01718-JW Document 16 Filed 12/20/07 Page 2 of 2