Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-00079/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-00079-0/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOHN L. CROSBY, II, 

Plaintiff,

 vs.

POITITER, et al, 

Defendants.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 06-0079 JSW (PR)

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Plaintiff, an inmate at Atascadero State Hospital, has filed a pro se civil rights

complaint. Although Plaintiff’s complaint is largely unintelligible, it appears that

Plaintiff is actually requesting copies of documents filed in other cases rather than

stating a new claim on the Court’s civil rights complaint form. As the complaint fails

to state a claim upon which relief will be granted, the Court will dismiss this matter. 

DISCUSSION

A. Standard of Review

Federal courts must engage in a preliminary screening of cases in which

prisoners seek redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a

governmental entity. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). In its review the court must identify

any cognizable claims, and dismiss any claims which are frivolous, malicious, fail to

state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seek monetary relief from a

defendant who is immune from such relief. See id. at 1915A(b)(1),(2). Pro se

pleadings must be liberally construed. See Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep't, 901 F.2d

696, 699 (9th Cir. 1990).

Case 3:06-cv-00079-JSW Document 4 Filed 04/18/06 Page 1 of 3
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

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two essential

elements: (1) that a violation of a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the

United States was violated, and (2) that the alleged deprivation was committed by a

person acting under the color of state law. See West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988).

B. Plaintiff’s Complaint

In this case, Plaintiff does not set forth factual allegations in support of a legal

claim. Rather, Plaintiff appears to request copies of documents from his many prior

cases filed in this Court, including C 04-1353 JSW; C 04-2182 JSW; C 04-2183 JSW;

C 04 2373 JSW; and C 05-4464 JSW, which remains open. A claim that is totally

incomprehensible may be dismissed as frivolous as it is without an arguable basis in

law. See Jackson v. Arizona, 885 F.2d 639, 641 (9th Cir. 1989). The Court is unable

to ascertain a cognizable federal claim from Plaintiff’s incomprehensible complaint. 

Moreover, it appears that although Plaintiff has filled out this Court’s civil

rights complaint form, he is not attempting to file a complaint, but is instead asking the

Court Clerk to make copies of all documents in each of the previous cases that he has

filed and to waive the fee ordinarily charged for these copies. However, Plaintiff’s

request is DENIED. Plaintiff has not stated a proper basis for the Clerk to waive the

ordinary fee in each case, nor has Plaintiff identified a reason why he needs so many

documents from so many cases. Plaintiff’s request is also improperly filed as a new

case. If Plaintiff can establish a legitimate basis for making such a request with regard

to any prior case, he must set forth the reason he needs each particular document and

identify the docket number of the case. Plaintiff may not make requests for documents

on multiple cases simultaneously, but must clearly identify the docket number of the

case on which he is requesting copies. 

CONCLUSION

For the forgoing reasons, Plaintiff’s complaint is hereby DISMISSED for the

reasons set forth above. The Clerk shall close the file, TERMINATE all pending

Case 3:06-cv-00079-JSW Document 4 Filed 04/18/06 Page 2 of 3
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

motions as moot and enter judgment in this case. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: April 18, 2006 JEFFREY S. WHITE

 United States District Judge

Case 3:06-cv-00079-JSW Document 4 Filed 04/18/06 Page 3 of 3