Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-03160/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-03160-0/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANTHONY WILLIAMS,

Plaintiff, No. 2:09-cv-3160 KJN P

vs.

SULLIVAN, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel. Plaintiff seeks relief

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and has requested leave to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 1915. This proceeding was referred to this court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)

and Local Rule 302.

Plaintiff has submitted a declaration that makes the showing required by 

28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). Accordingly, the request to proceed in forma pauperis will be granted.

Plaintiff is required to pay the statutory filing fee of $350.00 for this action. 

28 U.S.C. §§ 1914(a), 1915(b)(1). By this order, plaintiff will be assessed an initial partial filing

fee in accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). By separate order, the court

will direct the appropriate agency to collect the initial partial filing fee from plaintiff’s prison

trust account and forward it to the Clerk of the Court. Thereafter, plaintiff will be obligated to

Case 2:09-cv-03160-KJN Document 7 Filed 03/17/10 Page 1 of 7
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

make monthly payments of twenty percent of the preceding month’s income credited to

plaintiff’s prison trust account. These payments will be forwarded by the appropriate agency to

the Clerk of the Court each time the amount in plaintiff’s account exceeds $10.00, until the filing

fee is paid in full. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2).

The court has reviewed plaintiff’s complaint and, for the limited purposes of

§ 1915A screening, finds that it states a cognizable claim against defendant Sullivan. See 28

U.S.C. § 1915A.

For the reasons stated below, the court finds that the complaint does not state a

cognizable claim against defendants Dematteo and Bal. The claims against those defendants are

hereby dismissed with leave to amend. 

Plaintiff may proceed forthwith to serve defendant Sullivan and pursue his claims

against only that defendant or he may delay serving any defendant and attempt to state a

cognizable claim against defendants Dematteo and Bal.

If plaintiff elects to attempt to amend his complaint to state a cognizable claim

against defendants Dematteo and Bal, he has thirty days so to do. He is not obligated to amend

his complaint.

If plaintiff elects to proceed forthwith against defendant Sullivan, against whom

he has stated a cognizable claim for relief, then within thirty days he must return materials for

service of process enclosed herewith. In this event the court will construe plaintiff’s election as

consent to dismissal of all claims against defendants Dematteo and Bal without prejudice. 

Any amended complaint must show the federal court has jurisdiction, the action is

brought in the right place, and plaintiff is entitled to relief if plaintiff’s allegations are true. It

must contain a request for particular relief. Plaintiff must identify as a defendant only persons

who personally participated in a substantial way in depriving plaintiff of a federal constitutional

right. Johnson v. Duffy, 588 F.2d 740, 743 (9th Cir. 1978) (a person subjects another to the

deprivation of a constitutional right if he does an act, participates in another’s act or omits to

Case 2:09-cv-03160-KJN Document 7 Filed 03/17/10 Page 2 of 7
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

perform an act he is legally required to do that causes the alleged deprivation). If plaintiff

contends he was the victim of a conspiracy, he must identify the participants and allege their

agreement to deprive him of a specific federal constitutional right. 

In an amended complaint, the allegations must be set forth in numbered

paragraphs. Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(b). Plaintiff may join multiple claims if they are all against a

single defendant. Fed. R. Civ. P. 18(a). If plaintiff has more than one claim based upon separate

transactions or occurrences, the claims must be set forth in separate paragraphs. Fed. R. Civ. P.

10(b).

The federal rules contemplate brevity. See Galbraith v. County of Santa Clara,

307 F.3d 1119, 1125 (9th Cir. 2002) (noting that “nearly all of the circuits have now disapproved

any heightened pleading standard in cases other than those governed by Rule 9(b)”); Fed. R. Civ.

P. 84; cf. Rule 9(b) (setting forth rare exceptions to simplified pleading). Plaintiff’s claims must

be set forth in short and plain terms, simply, concisely and directly. See Swierkiewicz v. Sorema

N.A., 534 U.S. 506, 514 (2002) (“Rule 8(a) is the starting point of a simplified pleading system,

which was adopted to focus litigation on the merits of a claim.”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 8. Plaintiff must

not include any preambles, introductions, argument, speeches, explanations, stories, griping,

vouching, evidence, attempts to negate possible defenses, summaries, and the like. McHenry v.

Renne, 84 F.3d 1172, 1177-78 (9th Cir. 1996) (affirming dismissal of § 1983 complaint for

violation of Rule 8 after warning); see Crawford-El v. Britton, 523 U.S. 574, 597 (1998)

(reiterating that “firm application of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is fully warranted” in

prisoner cases). The court (and defendant) should be able to read and understand plaintiff’s

pleading within minutes. McHenry, 84 F.3d at 1179-80. A long, rambling pleading including

many defendants with unexplained, tenuous or implausible connection to the alleged

constitutional injury, or joining a series of unrelated claims against many defendants, very likely

will result in delaying the review required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915 and an order dismissing

plaintiff’s action pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41 for violation of these instructions. 

Case 2:09-cv-03160-KJN Document 7 Filed 03/17/10 Page 3 of 7
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

A district court must construe a pro se pleading “liberally” to determine if it states

a claim and, prior to dismissal, tell a plaintiff of deficiencies in his complaint and give plaintiff

an opportunity to cure them. See Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1130-31 (9th Cir. 2000). 

While detailed factual allegations are not required, “[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a

cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not suffice.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129

S.Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009) (citing Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)). 

Plaintiff must set forth “sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that

is plausible on its face.’” Id. (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570). 

A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual

content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that

the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged. The plausibility

standard is not akin to a “probability requirement,” but it asks for

more than a sheer possibility that a defendant has acted unlawfully.

Where a complaint pleads facts that are merely consistent with a

defendant’s liability, it stops short of the line between possibility

and plausibility of entitlement to relief.

Id. (citations and quotation marks omitted). Although legal conclusions can provide the

framework of a complaint, they must be supported by factual allegations, and are not entitled to

the assumption of truth. Id. at 1950. 

An amended complaint must be complete in itself without reference to any prior

pleading. Local Rule 15-220; see Loux v. Rhay, 375 F.2d 55, 57 (9th Cir. 1967). Once plaintiff

files an amended complaint, the original pleading is superseded.

By signing an amended complaint, plaintiff certifies he has made reasonable

inquiry and has evidentiary support for his allegations, and for violation of this rule the court may

impose sanctions sufficient to deter repetition by plaintiff or others. Fed. R. Civ. P. 11. 

A prisoner may bring no § 1983 action until he has exhausted such administrative

remedies as are available to him. 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a). The requirement is mandatory. Booth

v. Churner, 532 U.S. 731, 741 (2001). California prisoners or parolees may appeal “any

departmental decision, action, condition, or policy which they can demonstrate as having an

Case 2:09-cv-03160-KJN Document 7 Filed 03/17/10 Page 4 of 7
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

adverse effect upon their welfare.” Cal. Code Regs. tit. 15, §§ 3084.1, et seq. An appeal must be

presented on a CDC form 602 that asks simply that the prisoner “describe the problem” and

“action requested.” Therefore, this court ordinarily will review only claims against prison

officials within the scope of the problem reported in a CDC form 602 or an interview or claims

that were or should have been uncovered in the review promised by the department. Plaintiff is

further admonished that by signing an amended complaint he certifies his claims are warranted

by existing law, including the law that he exhaust administrative remedies, and that for violation

of this rule plaintiff risks dismissal of his entire action, including his claims against defendant

Sullivan. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted.

2. Plaintiff is obligated to pay the statutory filing fee of $350.00 for this action. 

Plaintiff is assessed an initial partial filing fee in accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(b)(1). All fees shall be collected and paid in accordance with this court’s order to the

Director of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation filed concurrently

herewith.

3. Claims against defendants Dematteo and Bal are dismissed with leave to

amend. Within thirty days of service of this order, plaintiff may amend his complaint to attempt

to state cognizable claims against these defendants. Plaintiff is not obliged to amend his

complaint.

4. The allegations in the pleading are sufficient at least to state cognizable claims

against defendant Sullivan. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. With this order the Clerk of the Court shall

provide to plaintiff a blank summons, a copy of the pleading filed November 13, 2009, 1

USM-285 form and instructions for service of process on defendant Sullivan. Within thirty days

of service of this order plaintiff may return the attached Notice of Submission of Documents with

the completed summons, the completed USM-285 form, and 2 copies of the endorsed November

Case 2:09-cv-03160-KJN Document 7 Filed 03/17/10 Page 5 of 7
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

6

13, 2009, complaint. The court will transmit them to the United States Marshal for service of

process pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4. Defendant Sullivan will be required to respond to

plaintiff’s allegations within the deadlines stated in Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(1). In this event, the

court will construe plaintiff’s election to proceed forthwith as consent to an order dismissing his

defective claims against defendants Dematteo and Bal without prejudice.

5. Failure to comply with this order will result in a recommendation that this

action be dismissed.

DATED: March 16, 2010

_____________________________________

KENDALL J. NEWMAN

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

will3160.14.option

Case 2:09-cv-03160-KJN Document 7 Filed 03/17/10 Page 6 of 7
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 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANTHONY WILLIAMS,

Plaintiff, No. 2:09-cv-3160 KJN P

vs.

SULLIVAN, et al.,

Defendants. NOTICE OF SUBMISSION OF DOCUMENTS

 /

Plaintiff hereby submits the following documents in compliance with the court's order

filed :

 1 completed summons form

 1 completed forms USM-285 

 2 copies of the 11/13/09 

 Complaint

Plaintiff consents to the dismissal of defendants Dematteo and Bal without prejudice.

OR

_____ Plaintiff opts to file an amended complaint and delay service of process.

Dated: 

 

 Plaintiff

Case 2:09-cv-03160-KJN Document 7 Filed 03/17/10 Page 7 of 7