Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_13-cv-00556/USCOURTS-casd-3_13-cv-00556-0/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DAVID VEGA, 

CDCR #v-25287, Civil

No. 13cv0556 MMA (RBB)

Plaintiff, ORDER:

(1) GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION TO PROCEED IN 

FORMA PAUPERIS,

IMPOSING

NO INITIAL PARTIAL

FILING FEE AND

GARNISHING BALANCE

FROM PRISONER’S TRUST

ACCOUNT PURSUANT 

TO 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) 

[Doc. No. 8] 

AND

(2) DIRECTING U.S.

MARSHAL TO EFFECT

SERVICE OF SECOND

AMENDED COMPLAINT

PURSUANT TO 

FED.R.CIV.P. 4(c)(3) & 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d)

vs.

CALIFORNIA DEP’T OF CORRECTIONS

AND REHABILITATION; S. KO; VON

LINTIG; MICHAEL FRAZE; TOVARES;

GOMES, R.N.; JOHN AND JANE DOES,

Defendants.

David Edward Vega (“Plaintiff”), a prisoner currently incarcerated at California

Men’s Colony located in San Luis Obispo, California, proceeding pro se, has filed a civil

rights Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

1 13cv0556 MMA (RBB)

Case 3:13-cv-00556-MMA-RBB Document 13 Filed 09/09/13 Page 1 of 6
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

Plaintiff has not prepaid the $350 filing fee mandated by 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a);

instead he has filed a Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (“IFP”) pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(a) (Doc. No. 5). Before the Court could conduct the required sua sponte

screening, the Court permitted Plaintiff to file a First Amended Complaint, as well as a

Second Amended Complaint which is the operative pleading.

I. 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 plaintiff’s failure to

prepay the entire fee only if he 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). However, a

prisoner granted leave to proceed IFP remains obligated to pay the entire fee in

installments, regardless of whether his action is ultimately dismissed. See 28 U.S.C. §

1915(b)(1) & (2); Taylor v. Delatoore, 281 F.3d 844, 847 (9th Cir. 2002).

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915, as amended by the Prison Litigation Reform Act

(“PLRA”), a prisoner seeking leave to proceed IFP must submit a “certified copy of the

trust fund account statement (or institutional equivalent) for the prisoner for the six-month

period immediately preceding the filing of the complaint.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2);

Andrews v. King, 398 F.3d 1113, 1119 (9th Cir. 2005). From the certified trust account

statement, the Court must assess an initial payment of 20% of (a) the average monthly

deposits in the account for the past six months, or (b) the average monthly balance in the

account for the past six months, whichever is greater, unless the prisoner has no assets. 

See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1); 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(4). The institution having custody of the

prisoner must collect subsequent payments, assessed at 20% of the preceding month’s

income, in any month in which the prisoner’s account exceeds $10, and forward those

payments to the Court until the entire filing fee is paid. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2).

In support of his IFP Motion, Plaintiff has submitted a certified copy of his trust

account statement pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2) and S.D.CAL.CIVLR 3.2. Andrews,

2 13cv0556 MMA (RBB)

Case 3:13-cv-00556-MMA-RBB Document 13 Filed 09/09/13 Page 2 of 6
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

398 F.3d at 1119. Plaintiff’s trust account statement shows a current available balance of

zero. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(4) (providing that “[i]n no event shall a prisoner be

prohibited from bringing a civil action or appealing a civil action or criminal judgment for

the reason that the prisoner has no assets and no means by which to pay [an] initial partial

filing fee.”); Taylor, 281 F.3d at 850 (finding that 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(4) acts as a “safetyvalve” preventing dismissal of a prisoner’s IFP case based solely on a “failure to pay

... due to the lack of funds available.”). 

Therefore, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed IFP (Doc. No. 5), and

assesses no initial partial filing fee per 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). However, the entire $350

balance of the filing fees mandated shall be collected and forwarded to the Clerk of the

Court pursuant to the installment payment provisions set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1).

II. SCREENING PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2) & 1915A(b)

The PLRA also obligates the Court to review complaints filed by all persons

proceeding IFP and by those, like Plaintiff, who are “incarcerated or detained in any

facility [and] accused of, sentenced for, or adjudicated delinquent for, violations of

criminal law or the terms or conditions of parole, probation, pretrial release, or

diversionary program,” “as soon as practicable after docketing.” See 28 U.S.C. §§

1915(e)(2) and 1915A(b). Under these provisions of the PLRA, the Court must sua sponte

dismiss complaints, or any portions thereof, which are frivolous, malicious, fail to state

a claim, or which seek damages from defendants who are immune. See 28 U.S.C. §§

1915(e)(2)(B) and 1915A; Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1126-27 (9th Cir. 2000) (en

banc) (§ 1915(e)(2)); Rhodes v. Robinson, 621 F.3d 1002, 1004 (9th Cir. 2010)

(discussing 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)).

“[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) (noting that § 1915(e)(2) “parallels the

language of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6)”). In addition, courts “have an

3 13cv0556 MMA (RBB)

Case 3:13-cv-00556-MMA-RBB Document 13 Filed 09/09/13 Page 3 of 6
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

obligation where the petitioner is pro se, particularly in civil rights cases, to construe the

pleadings liberally and to afford the petitioner the benefit of any doubt.” Hebbe v. Pliler,

627 F.3d 338, 342 & n.7 (9th Cir. 2010) (citing Bretz v. Kelman, 773 F.2d 1026, 1027 n.1

(9th Cir. 1985)). The court may not, however, “supply essential elements of claims that

were not initially pled.” Ivey v. Board of Regents of the University of Alaska, 673 F.2d

266, 268 (9th Cir. 1982). “Vague and conclusory allegations of official participation in

civil rights violations are not sufficient to withstand a motion to dismiss.” 

As currently pleaded, the Court finds Plaintiff’s allegations sufficient to survive the

sua sponte screening required by 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2) and 1915A(b).1

 See Lopez, 203

F.3d at 1126-27. Accordingly, the Court finds Plaintiff is entitled to U.S. Marshal service

on his behalf. See 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)(3) (“[T]he court

may order that service be made by a United States marshal or deputy marshal ... if the

plaintiff is authorized to proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915.”).

III. CONCLUSION AND ORDER

 Good cause appearing,

1. The Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed IFP pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(a).

2. The Secretary of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation,

or his designee, shall collect from Plaintiff’s prison trust account the $350 filing fee owed

in this case by collecting monthly payments from the account in an amount equal to

twenty percent (20%) of the preceding month’s income and forward payments to the Clerk

of the Court each time the amount in the account exceeds $10 in accordance with 28

U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2). ALL PAYMENTS SHALL BE CLEARLY IDENTIFIED BY THE

NAME AND NUMBER ASSIGNED TO THIS ACTION.

1

 Plaintiff is cautioned that “the sua sponte screening and dismissal procedure is cumulative of,

and not a substitute for, any subsequent Rule 12[] motion that [a defendant] may choose to bring.” 

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

4 13cv0556 MMA (RBB)

Case 3:13-cv-00556-MMA-RBB Document 13 Filed 09/09/13 Page 4 of 6
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. The Court DIRECTS the Clerk of the Court to serve a copy of this Order on

Jeffrey A. Beard, Secretary, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, P.O.

Box 942883, Sacramento, California, 94283-0001.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:

4. The Clerk shall issue a summons as to Plaintiff’s Second Amended

Complaint (Doc. No. 10) upon Defendants and shall and forward it to Plaintiff along with

a blank U.S. Marshal Form 285 for each Defendant. In addition, the Clerk shall provide

Plaintiff with a certified copy of this Order, a certified copy of his Second Amended

Complaint (Doc. No. 10), and the summons so that he may serve each named Defendant. 

Upon receipt of this “IFP Package,” Plaintiff is directed to complete the Form 285s as

completely and accurately as possible, and to return them to the United States Marshal

according to the instructions provided by the Clerk in the letter accompanying his IFP

package. Upon receipt, the U.S. Marshal shall serve a copy of the Second Amended

Complaint and summons upon each Defendant as directed by Plaintiff on the USM Form

285s. All costs of service shall be advanced by the United States. See 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(d); FED.R.CIV.P. 4(c)(3).

5. Defendants are thereafter ORDERED to reply to Plaintiff’s Second

Amended Complaint within the time provided by the applicable provisions of Federal

Rule of Civil Procedure 12(a). See 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(g)(2) (while a defendant may

occasionally be permitted to “waive the right to reply to any action brought by a prisoner

confined in any jail, prison, or other correctional facility under section 1983,” once the

Court has conducted its sua sponte screening pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) and

§ 1915A(b), and thus, has made a preliminary determination based on the face on the

pleading alone that Plaintiff has a “reasonable opportunity to prevail on the merits,” the

defendant is required to respond). 

6. Plaintiff shall serve upon the 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

5 13cv0556 MMA (RBB)

Case 3:13-cv-00556-MMA-RBB Document 13 Filed 09/09/13 Page 5 of 6
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

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

correct copy 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: September 9, 2013

Hon. Michael M. Anello

United States District Judge

6 13cv0556 MMA (RBB)

Case 3:13-cv-00556-MMA-RBB Document 13 Filed 09/09/13 Page 6 of 6