Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-00555/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-00555-6/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GEORGE DENNIS ROUNDS,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-05-0555 GEB GGH P 

vs.

JEANNE S. WOODFORD, et al.,

Defendants. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to

42 U.S.C. § 1983. On June 19, 2006, the court granted defendants’ September 26, 2005, motion

to dismiss pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) with leave to amend. Pending before the court is

plaintiff’s second amended complaint filed November 3, 2006. Plaintiff has not cured the

pleading defects discussed in the June 19, 2006, order. Accordingly, the court recommends that

this action be dismissed. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(court may dismiss case at any time if it

determines that it fails to state a claim for which relief may be granted).

/////

/////

/////

Case 2:05-cv-00555-GEB-GGH Document 25 Filed 12/26/06 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

2

The only defendant identified in the second amended complaint is Jeanne

Woodford, Director of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR). 

Plaintiff seeks injunctive and declaratory relief only.

Plaintiff alleges that he has been housed in open dormitories since 1993. Plaintiff

alleges that these dormitories are severely overcrowded and understaffed, resulting in

unconstitutional conditions of confinement.

In particular, plaintiff alleges that the severe overcrowding makes the prison more

dangerous. Second Amended Complaint, ¶ 12. Plaintiff alleges that as a result of understaffing,

weapons are easily accessible to inmates. Id. 

Plaintiff alleges that overcrowding has caused the dormitories to be inadequately

supplied with cleaning supplies. Id., ¶ 13. As a result, plaintiff has been forced to live in

unsanitary living conditions. Id.

Plaintiff alleges that as a result of overcrowding, he has been housed with inmates

who tested positive for tuberculosis. Id., ¶ 14. 

Plaintiff alleges that the overcrowding has subjected him to improper ventilation,

inadequate heating and cooling systems. Id., ¶ 15. Plaintiff alleges that these conditions have

caused him to acquire respiratory problems. Id. 

Plaintiff alleges that the overcrowding has “stripped him of incentives and hope of

ever being paroled by the BPH due to his living in constant peril of life and increased risk of

disciplinary and insufficient programming.” Id., ¶ 16. Overcrowding has adversely affected his

ability to maintain close ties with his family and participate in therapy and self-help

programming. Id. 

Plaintiff alleges that overcrowding has resulted in understaffing in various

departments including medical, dental, inmate mailroom, inmate visiting room and the law

library. Id., ¶ 17. 

/////

Case 2:05-cv-00555-GEB-GGH Document 25 Filed 12/26/06 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

3

The gravamen of this action is that the prisons are unconstitutionally

overcrowded. Allegations of overcrowding alone are insufficient to state a claim under the

Eighth Amendment. Rhodes v. Chapman, 452 U.S. 337, 348, 101 S. Ct. 2392 (1981); Balla v.

Idaho State Bd. of Corr., 869 F.2d 461, 471 (9 Cir. 1989). Where crowding causes an increase th

in violence or reduces the provision of other constitutionally required services, or reaches a level

where the institution is no longer fit for human habitation, however, the prisoner may be able to

state a claim. Balla, 869 F.2d at 471. As the following paragraphs make clear, plaintiff’s

allegations only demonstrate a potential effect that overcrowding may have, or allege a highly

speculative cause and effect relationship between overcrowding and the alleged harm to be

avoided, or refer to “rights” denied by overcrowding which find no source in the Constitution. 

Plaintiff alleges that the prisons have become more dangerous due to

overcrowding. As stated above, an increase in violence caused by overcrowding states a

colorable claim. However, plaintiff’s claim regarding increased violence is vague. Plaintiff does

not describe the increased violence in any detail. Nor does plaintiff discuss how the violence was

caused by overcrowding. Because this claim is not well supported, it should be dismissed.

Plaintiff next alleges that the overcrowding has caused the prisons to become

unhygienic. In support of this claim, plaintiff alleges that he was not provided with adequate

cleaning supplies. Plaintiff does not specifically describe the unhygienic conditions that were

caused by the inadequate cleaning supplies. Accordingly, this claim should be dismissed because

plaintiff has not plead specific facts demonstrating that overcrowding has caused him to be

exposed to unhygienic conditions.

Plaintiff alleges that he has been housed with inmates who tested positive for

tuberculosis. Plaintiff does not allege that he himself has contracted tuberculosis. Therefore, any

injury caused by this condition is speculative. Accordingly, this claim should be dismissed.

/////

/////

Case 2:05-cv-00555-GEB-GGH Document 25 Filed 12/26/06 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

 In the June 19, 2006, order, the court suggested that if plaintiff filed a second amended

1

complaint, he might consider alleging direct violations of his constitutional rights rather than

linking these claims to a claim of overcrowding. In the second amended complaint, plaintiff

chose to ignore this suggestion. 

4

Plaintiff alleges that he has been subjected to inadequate ventilation, heating and

cooling systems as a result of overcrowding. This claim is vague and conclusory. Plaintiff does

not describe how these systems are inadequate. Nor does plaintiff discuss why overcrowding

caused the inadequacy of these systems. Accordingly, this claim should be dismissed.

Plaintiff alleges that he has been denied access to self-help and therapy programs

due to overcrowding, which has affected his chances of being paroled. Plaintiff does not

describe in any detail what particular programs he has not had access to. Nor does plaintiff

discuss why overcrowding caused his inability to attend these programs. Because this claim is

vague and conclusory, it should be dismissed.

Plaintiff alleges that overcrowding has resulted in understaffing in various

departments including medical, dental, mail room, visiting room and the law library. Other than

this conclusory allegation, plaintiff does not allege that he suffered any injury as a result of the

alleged understaffing. Plaintiff does not allege, for example, that he was denied adequate dental

care as a result of understaffing caused by overcrowding. Because this claim is vague and

conclusory, it should be dismissed.

Because it does not appear that plaintiff can cure the pleading defects discussed

above, the court recommends that this action be dismissed.1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed. 

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

Case 2:05-cv-00555-GEB-GGH Document 25 Filed 12/26/06 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

5

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: 12/26/06

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

 

GREGORY G. HOLLOWS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

rounds.dis

Case 2:05-cv-00555-GEB-GGH Document 25 Filed 12/26/06 Page 5 of 5