Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_03-cv-02626/USCOURTS-cand-5_03-cv-02626-0/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

P:\PRO-SE\SJ.Jw\CR.03\taylor2626dismissal.wpd

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

NOT FOR CITATION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

JEFFREY LAMONT TAYLOR,

Plaintiff(s),

 v.

SENIOR LIBRARIAN BURKS, STAFF

LIBRARIAN GARCIA, EDUCATION

DIRECTOR CRAWFORD, et al.,

Defendant(s).

 /

NO. C 03-02626 JW 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Plaintiff initiated this civil rights suit on June 5, 2003. His allegations involved his treatment

by staff at Salinas Valley State Prison regarding his attempts to access the library. His allegations,

however, were extremely disjointed and unclear. Accordingly, by order dated February 10, 2004,

the Court granted Plaintiff leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismissed the complaint with

leave to amend. 

On February 24, 2004, Plaintiff filed an amended complaint. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section

1915A, the Court now must screen the complaint. 

Case 5:03-cv-02626-JW Document 16 Filed 05/09/06 Page 1 of 4
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

P:\PRO-SE\SJ.Jw\CR.03\taylor2626dismissal.wpd2

Plaintiff continues to allege that numerous defendants conspired together to deny him access

to the prison law library. Plaintiff also alleges that he was discriminated against because he is

Jewish, African American, and mentally disabled. Plaintiffs allegations do not rise to the level of a

constitutional violation, however.

Prisoners have a constitutional right of access to the courts. See Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S.

343, 350 (1996); Bounds v. Smith, 430 U.S. 817, 821 (1977). To establish a claim for any violation

of the right of access to the courts, the prisoner must prove that there was an inadequacy in the

prison's legal access program that caused him an actual injury. See Lewis, 518 U.S. at 350-55. To

prove an actual injury, the prisoner must show that the inadequacy in the prison's program hindered

his efforts to pursue a non-frivolous claim concerning his conviction or conditions of confinement. 

See id. at 354-55; see, e.g., Jones v. Blanas, 393 F.3d 918, 936 (9th Cir. 2004) (agreeing with

district court that prisoner “did not allege injury, such as inability to file a complaint or defend

against a charge, stemming from the restrictions on his access to the law library”). 

Like Jones, Plaintiff in this case does not allege an actual inability to file a complaint or

defend against a charge. Instead, Plaintiff alleges that he was unable to prepare, present, and file

several motions because he was denied access to the library. Plaintiff, however, does not provide

enough information about the nature of these “motions” to determine whether the motions would

have been “non-frivolous.” Nor does Plaintiff explain how he suffered an actual injury by not being

able to file them. Accordingly, the claim must be dismissed.

Plaintiff apparently also wishes to pursue various claims of discrimination. In general,

prisoners are protected under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment from

discrimination. Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539, 556 (1974) (citation omitted). Invidious

discrimination, such as racial segregation within prisons, is unconstitutional, save for the necessities

of prison security and discipline. See Cruz v. Beto, 405 U.S. 319, 321 (1972); Johnson v. California,

207 F.3d 650, 655 (9th Cir. 2000).

In the present case, however, Plaintiff fails to plead sufficient facts to make out a claim of

Case 5:03-cv-02626-JW Document 16 Filed 05/09/06 Page 2 of 4
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

P:\PRO-SE\SJ.Jw\CR.03\taylor2626dismissal.wpd3

discrimination, other than alleging that defendants made discriminatory and derogatory statements. 

While such statements are abhorrent, they do not rise to the level of a constitutional violation. See

e.g. Keenan v. Hall, 83 F.3d 1083, 1092 (9th Cir. 1996), amended 135 F.3d 1318 (9th Cir. 1998)

(disrespectful and assaultive comments not enough to state constitutional claim); Oltarzewski v.

Ruggiero, 830 F.2d 136, 139 (9th Cir. 1987) (vulgar language does not state constitutional claim).

Accordingly, this action is DISMISSED with prejudice. All pending motions are DENIED

as moot. 

Dated: May 8, 2006 

JAMES WARE

United States District Judge

Case 5:03-cv-02626-JW Document 16 Filed 05/09/06 Page 3 of 4
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

P:\PRO-SE\SJ.Jw\CR.03\taylor2626dismissal.wpd

THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT COPIES OF THIS ORDER HAVE BEEN MAILED TO:

Jeffrey Lamont Taylor

Salinas Valley State Prison

P. O. Box 1060

Soledad, Ca 93960-1060

Dated: May 9, 2006 Richard W. Wieking, Clerk

By:__/s/___________________ Melissa Peralta

Courtroom Deputy

Case 5:03-cv-02626-JW Document 16 Filed 05/09/06 Page 4 of 4