Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-02415/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-02415-3/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 

27 

28 

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

GERROD LONZELL HERNDON, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

RIO CONSUMNES CORRECTIONAL 

CENTER, 

Defendant. 

No. 2:15-cv-2415 KJM AC P 

ORDER 

 Plaintiff, a former county and current state prisoner proceeding pro se, 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 by Local Rule 302 pursuant to 28 

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 

I. Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis 

 Plaintiff has submitted a request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 

U.S.C. § 1915. ECF No. 2. Plaintiff has not, however, filed a certified copy of his prison trust 

account statement for the six-month period immediately preceding the filing of the complaint. 

See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2). The court recently began using a new application to proceed in 

forma pauperis that authorizes the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation 

(CDCR) to provide a certified copy of plaintiff’s trust account statement directly to the court. 

Therefore, instead of having plaintiff submit a certified copy of his trust account statement, his 

Case 2:15-cv-02415-KJM-AC Document 12 Filed 11/08/16 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 

27 

28 

2

previous request will be denied and he will be provided a copy of the new form, which he should 

complete and file in this case so that the court may obtain a certified copy of his trust account 

statement directly from the CDCR. No action will be taken with regards to plaintiff’s complaint 

until such time as he submits the new in forma pauperis application. See L.R. 121(c). 

II. Statutory Screening of Prisoner Complaints 

The court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against a 

governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The 

court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are legally 

“frivolous or malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek 

monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1), (2). 

 A claim “is [legally] frivolous where it lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact.” 

Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989); Franklin v. Murphy, 745 F.2d 1221, 1227-28 (9th 

Cir. 1984). “[A] judge may dismiss [in forma pauperis] claims which are based on indisputably 

meritless legal theories or whose factual contentions are clearly baseless.” Jackson v. Arizona, 

885 F.2d 639, 640 (9th Cir. 1989) (citation and internal quotations omitted), superseded by statute 

on other grounds as stated in Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1130 (9th Cir. 2000); Neitzke, 490 

U.S. at 327. The critical inquiry is whether a constitutional claim, however inartfully pleaded, 

has an arguable legal and factual basis. Id. 

“Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2) requires only ‘a short and plain statement of the 

claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief,’ in order to ‘give the defendant fair notice of 

what the . . . claim is and the grounds upon which it rests.’” Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 

U.S. 544, 555 (2007) (alteration in original) (quoting Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 47 (1957)). 

However, in order to survive dismissal for failure to state a claim, a complaint must contain more 

than “a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action;” it must contain factual 

allegations sufficient “to raise a right to relief above the speculative level.” Id. (citations 

omitted). “[T]he pleading must contain something more . . . than . . . a statement of facts that 

merely creates a suspicion [of] a legally cognizable right of action.” Id. (alteration in original) 

//// 

Case 2:15-cv-02415-KJM-AC Document 12 Filed 11/08/16 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 

27 

28 

3

(quoting 5 Charles Alan Wright & Arthur R. Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure ' 1216 (3d 

ed. 2004)). 

“[A] complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to 

relief that is plausible on its face.’” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell 

Atl. Corp., 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.” Id. (citing Bell Atl. Corp., 550 U.S. at 556). In reviewing a complaint 

under this standard, the court must accept as true the allegations of the complaint in question, 

Hospital Bldg. Co. v. Rex Hosp. Trs., 425 U.S. 738, 740 (1976), as well as construe the pleading 

in the light most favorable to the plaintiff and resolve all doubts in the plaintiff’s favor, Jenkins v. 

McKeithen, 395 U.S. 411, 421 (1969). 

III. Failure to State a Claim 

Plaintiff lists a number of defendants and appears to claim that they have ruled that he is a 

liar. ECF No. 1 at 2-3. The complaint also includes the phrase “Hoax Indicement [sic]” and 

requests money damages, clemency, and that he be discharged. Id. at 3. The court is unable to 

understand what kind of claim plaintiff is attempting to bring and it appears that he may actually 

be trying to bring a habeas petition. Because the court is unable to understand plaintiff’s 

allegations, the complaint will be dismissed and he will be given leave to amend. If plaintiff is 

trying to challenge his conviction, then his claims should be brought in a petition for writ of 

habeas corpus. 

IV. Leave to Amend 

If plaintiff chooses to file a first amended complaint, he must demonstrate how the 

conditions about which he complains resulted in a deprivation of his constitutional rights. Rizzo 

v. Goode, 423 U.S. 362, 370-71 (1976). Also, the complaint must allege in specific terms how 

each named defendant is involved. Arnold v. Int’l Bus. Machs. Corp., 637 F.2d 1350, 1355 (9th 

Cir. 1981). There can be no liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 unless there is some affirmative link 

or connection between a defendant’s actions and the claimed deprivation. Id.; Johnson v. Duffy, 

588 F.2d 740, 743 (9th Cir. 1978). Furthermore, “[v]ague and conclusory allegations of official 

Case 2:15-cv-02415-KJM-AC Document 12 Filed 11/08/16 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 

27 

28 

4

participation in civil rights violations are not sufficient.” Ivey v. Bd. of Regents, 673 F.2d 266, 

268 (9th Cir. 1982) (citations omitted). 

 Plaintiff is also informed that the court cannot refer to a prior pleading in order to make 

his first amended complaint complete. Local Rule 220 requires that an amended complaint be 

complete in itself without reference to any prior pleading. This is because, as a general rule, an 

amended complaint supersedes the original complaint. Loux v. Rhay, 375 F.2d 55, 57 (9th Cir. 

1967), overruled in part by Lacey v. Maricopa County, 693 F.3d 896, 929 (9th Cir. 2012) (claims 

dismissed with prejudice and without leave to amend do not have to be re-pled in subsequent 

amended complaint to preserve appeal). Once plaintiff files a first amended complaint, the 

original complaint no longer serves any function in the case. Therefore, in an amended 

complaint, as in an original complaint, each claim and the involvement of each defendant must be 

sufficiently alleged. 

V. Summary 

Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis is denied and plaintiff must submit another 

application on the form provided by the court. 

The complaint is dismissed with leave to amend because the court is unable to understand 

what plaintiff is claiming. If plaintiff chooses to amend his complaint, the first amended 

complaint must name all the defendants plaintiff wants to bring claims against and explain what 

each defendant did to violate his rights. Any claims or defendants not in the first amended 

complaint will not be considered. 

 In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 

 1. Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 2) is denied. 

2. Within thirty days of service of this order, plaintiff shall submit the completed 

Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis By a Prisoner that he receives from the court so that 

the court may obtain a certified copy of his trust account statement. Plaintiff’s failure to comply 

with this order will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. 

 3. Plaintiff’s complaint is dismissed with leave to amend. 

//// 

Case 2:15-cv-02415-KJM-AC Document 12 Filed 11/08/16 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 

27 

28 

5

 4. Within thirty days from the date of service of this order, plaintiff may file an amended 

complaint that complies with the requirements of the Civil Rights Act, the Federal Rules of Civil 

Procedure, and the Local Rules of Practice. The amended complaint must bear the docket 

number assigned this case and must be labeled “First Amended Complaint.” Plaintiff must file an 

original and two copies of the amended complaint. Failure to file an amended complaint in 

accordance with this order will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. 

5. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send plaintiff a copy of the prisoner complaint 

form used in this district and an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis By a Prisoner. 

DATED: November 8, 2016 

Case 2:15-cv-02415-KJM-AC Document 12 Filed 11/08/16 Page 5 of 5