Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-00270/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-00270-0/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANTHONY S. BERRINGER,

Plaintiff,

 v.

SALINAS VALLEY STATE PRISON,

DEPARTMENT OF MENTAL HEALTH,

Defendants. /

No. C 06-00270 CW

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Plaintiff Anthony S. Berringer is a state prisoner who is

currently incarcerated at Salinas Valley State Prison (SVSP). 

Plaintiff’s original complaint alleged that around 6:15 AM on March

7, 2005, two Medical Technical Assistants (MTAs) woke him up for

chow, one of them opened the food port and “scalding hot water 

. . . accidentally spilled on [him].” Plaintiff alleged that he

suffered second degree burns on his right foot and ankle.

The Court reviewed the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A

and found, liberally construing the allegations, that Plaintiff was

attempting to assert a claim of a violation of his Eighth Amendment

right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment. The Court

dismissed the complaint with leave to amend upon finding that

Plaintiff’s allegations were insufficient to support an Eighth

Case 4:06-cv-00270-CW Document 14 Filed 01/08/08 Page 1 of 5
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 2

Amendment claim on the following grounds. First, the only

Defendants Plaintiff named were “Salinas Valley State Prison” and

the “Department Mental Health Kitchen Staff Workers.” The Court

explained that Plaintiff may not refer to the defendants as a

group, but must identify each involved defendant by name and link

each person to a specific claim by explaining what each defendant

did or failed to do that caused a violation of Plaintiff’s

constitutional rights. The Court noted that Plaintiff attempted to

write the names of the two MTAs who spilled the water on his foot;

however, the names were indecipherable. Second, the Court

explained that even if the names were decipherable, Plaintiff would

not have stated a claim against them because he alleged that the

water was spilled accidentally, and mere negligence does not give

rise to a constitutional claim. Third, Plaintiff had not alleged

in his complaint that he had exhausted the required administrative

remedies for this claim. Instead, he stated that the SVSP staff

“lost his appeals and tampered with his documents.” 

The Court allowed Plaintiff to file an amended complaint to

identify each involved defendant by name and describe what actions

each defendant took that caused him harm, and how he was harmed by

each individual defendant. In doing so, Plaintiff could not allege

facts inconsistent with those alleged in his original complaint and

he could not refer to the defendants as a group, i.e., “Salinas

Valley State Prison” or the “Department Mental Health Kitchen

Workers.” Secondly, Plaintiff would have to provide evidence, in

the form of a declaration or in the form of copies of returned

administrative grievances, establishing that he should be excused

Case 4:06-cv-00270-CW Document 14 Filed 01/08/08 Page 2 of 5
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 3

from the exhaustion requirement because prison officials refused to

process his appeals.

On March 15, 2007, Plaintiff filed his amended complaint. The

Court has reviewed the amended complaint and finds that it does not

cure the pleading deficiencies identified in the Court’s order

dismissing the complaint with leave to amend. In the caption of

the complaint, Plaintiff lists Defendants as “Salinas Valley State

Prison” and “Department of Mental Health” even though the Court

explained that he must name the defendants as individuals, not as a

group. In the complaint, Plaintiff lists “SVSP Medical MTA Staff”

as the defendant, instead of the individuals involved. Plaintiff’s

factual allegations merely repeat what he stated in his original

complaint, that, on March 7, 2005, two MTAs woke him for chow and

one of them opened the food port and poured scalding hot water on

his left foot, causing second degree burns. In his claim for

relief Plaintiff states he would like M. Chaverine to be terminated

from her job, but he does not identify who this individual is, what

she did, nor why she should be terminated. Furthermore, in regard

to exhaustion of remedies, Plaintiff merely states that he did not

pursue higher levels of appeals for his administrative complaint

because “it was cancelled.” Plaintiff does not explain what he

means by saying the complaint was “cancelled.” He also states that

he did not pursue his appeal past the informal level because “the

disposition was either lost, cancelled, or denied.” Neither of

these statements relieves Plaintiff of the requirement of

exhausting his administrative appeals before he files a complaint

Case 4:06-cv-00270-CW Document 14 Filed 01/08/08 Page 3 of 5
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

1Plaintiff has filed a separate document unrelated to the

instant action, which indicates he cannot read or write. If

Plaintiff’s claim appeared to have merit, the Court could seek

counsel to represent him pro bono. That is not the case, however.

4

in federal court.1

Therefore, the Court finds that Plaintiff’s allegations in his

amended complaint do not state a claim for which relief may be

granted. The complaint is dismissed with prejudice and judgment

shall enter accordingly. The clerk shall close the file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 1/8/08 

CLAUDIA WILKEN

United States District Judge

Case 4:06-cv-00270-CW Document 14 Filed 01/08/08 Page 4 of 5
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 5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANTHONY S. BERRINGER,

Plaintiff,

 v.

SALINAS VALLEY STATE PRISON et al,

Defendant. /

Case Number: CV06-00270 CW 

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 January 8, 2008, 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.

Anthony Scott Berringer

K-66652

Pelican Bay State Prison

P.O. Box 7500

Crescent City, CA 95532

Dated: January 8, 2008

Richard W. Wieking, Clerk

By: Sheilah Cahill, Deputy Clerk

Case 4:06-cv-00270-CW Document 14 Filed 01/08/08 Page 5 of 5