Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_07-cv-00331/USCOURTS-casd-3_07-cv-00331-0/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

27

28

K:\COMMON\CHMB_15\FRIEDMAN\PRO SE FILED ORDERS\07-0331-G&S.wpd -1- 07cv0331

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GREGORY LYNN CAIN,

Inmate #6433561, Civil No. 07-0331 BTM (WMc)

Plaintiff, ORDER: 

(1) GRANTING MOTION TO

PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS, 

AND 

(2) DIRECTING U.S. MARSHAL TO

EFFECT SERVICE OF SUMMONS,

COMPLAINT AND EXHIBIT TO

COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO

FED.R.CIV.P. 4(c)(2) 

AND 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) 

vs.

SHERIFF BILL KOLENDER, DEPUTY

BUFFORD, DEPUTY SUNICA,

COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, 

JOHN DOES 1-7, 

Defendants.

Plaintiff, a civilly committed person residing at George Bailey Detention Facility in San

Diego, California and proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C.

§ 1983, along with a Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (“IFP”) [Doc. No. 2]. Plaintiff

alleges that his constitutional rights were violated when he was housed at George Bailey

Detention Facility in 2006. 

////

////

Case 3:07-cv-00331-BTM-WMC Document 6 Filed 06/19/07 Page 1 of 4
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

K:\COMMON\CHMB_15\FRIEDMAN\PRO SE FILED ORDERS\07-0331-G&S.wpd -2- 07cv0331

1I. Motion to Proceed IFP

All parties instituting any civil action, suit or proceeding in a district court of the United

States, except an application for writ of habeas corpus, must pay a filing fee of $350. See 28

U.S.C. § 1914(a). An action may proceed despite a party’s failure to prepay the entire fee only

if the party is granted leave to proceed IFP pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). See Rodriguez v.

Cook, 169 F.3d 1176, 1177 (9th Cir. 1999). Here, The Court finds that Plaintiff has submitted

an affidavit which complies with 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1) and S.D.CAL.CIVLR 3.2. Based upon

this financial information, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed IFP. Because

Plaintiff is a civil committee and not a “prisoner” as defined by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(h), the Court

will waive the initial civil filing fee. See Page v. Torrey, 201 F.3d 1136, 1139-40 (9th Cir.

2000).

II. Sua Sponte Screening per 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)

A complaint filed by any person proceeding in forma pauperis is subject to sua sponte

dismissal to the extent it is “frivolous, malicious, fail[s] to state a claim upon which relief may

be granted, or seek[s] monetary relief from a defendant immune from such relief.” 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(e)(2)(B); Calhoun v. Stahl, 254 F.3d 845, 845 (9th Cir. 2001) (per curiam) (holding that

“the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) are not limited to prisoners.”); Lopez v. Smith, 203

F.3d 1122, 1127 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc) (“[S]ection 1915(e) not only permits, but requires a

district court to dismiss an in forma pauperis complaint that fails to state a claim.”). 

“[W]hen determining whether a complaint states a claim, a court must accept as true all

allegations of material fact and must construe those facts in the light most favorable to the

plaintiff.” Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000); see also Barren v. Harrington,

152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir. 1998) (§ 1915(e)(2) “parallels the language of Federal Rule of 

Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).”). However, while liberal construction is “particularly important in

civil rights cases,” Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1261 (9th Cir. 1992), the Court may not

“supply essential elements of the claim that were not initially pled.” Ivey v. Board of Regents

of the University of Alaska, 673 F.2d 266, 268 (9th Cir. 1982). The district court should grant

leave to amend, however, unless it determines that “the pleading could not possibly be cured by

Case 3:07-cv-00331-BTM-WMC Document 6 Filed 06/19/07 Page 2 of 4
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

K:\COMMON\CHMB_15\FRIEDMAN\PRO SE FILED ORDERS\07-0331-G&S.wpd -3- 07cv0331

the allegation of other facts” and if it appears “at all possible that the plaintiff can correct the

defect.” Lopez, 203 F.3d at 1130-31.

Here, the Court finds that Plaintiff’s Complaint survives the sua sponte screening required

by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), and that Plaintiff is therefore automatically entitled to U.S. Marshal

service on his behalf. See Lopez, 203 F.3d at 1126-27; 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) (“The officers of

the court shall issue and serve all process, and perform all duties in [IFP] cases.”); FED.R.CIV.P.

4(c)(2) (providing that “service be effected by a United States marshal, deputy United States

marshal, or other officer specially appointed by the court ... when the plaintiff is authorized to

proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915.”). However, Plaintiff is cautioned that

“the sua sponte screening and dismissal procedure is cumulative of, and not a substitute for, any

subsequent Rule 12(b)(6) motion that [a defendant] may choose to bring.” Teahan v. Wilhelm,

481 F.Supp.2d 1115, 1119 (S.D. Cal. 2007).

III. Conclusion and Order

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed IFP per 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) [Doc. No. 2] is

GRANTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:

2. The Clerk shall issue the summons, provide Plaintiff with a certified copy of both

this Order and his Complaint, and forward them to Plaintiff along with a blank U.S. Marshal

Form 285 for each Defendant named in his Complaint. Plaintiff shall complete the Form 285s

and forward them to the United States Marshal. The U.S. Marshal shall then serve a copy of the

Complaint and summons upon Defendants as directed by Plaintiff on each U.S. Marshal Form

285. All costs of service shall be advanced by the United States. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d);

FED.R.CIV.P. 4(c)(2).

3. Plaintiff shall serve upon Defendants or, if appearance has been entered by

counsel, upon Defendants’ counsel, a copy of every further pleading or other document

submitted for consideration of the Court. Plaintiff shall include with the original paper to be

filed with the Clerk of the Court a certificate stating the manner in which a true and correct copy

Case 3:07-cv-00331-BTM-WMC Document 6 Filed 06/19/07 Page 3 of 4
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

K:\COMMON\CHMB_15\FRIEDMAN\PRO SE FILED ORDERS\07-0331-G&S.wpd -4- 07cv0331

of any document was served on Defendants, or counsel for Defendants, and the date of service.

Any paper received by the Court which has not been filed with the Clerk or which fails

to include a Certificate of Service will be disregarded.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: June 19, 2007

Hon. Barry Ted Moskowitz

United States District Judge

Case 3:07-cv-00331-BTM-WMC Document 6 Filed 06/19/07 Page 4 of 4