Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-05435/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-05435-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
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

No. C 09-5435 RS (PR)

1 ORDER

 *E-Filed 4/22/10*

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

DANIEL WOLF PHILLIPS, 

Plaintiff,

 v.

A. HEDGPETH, et al.,

Defendants.

_________________________________/

No. C 09-5435 RS (PR)

ORDER DISMISSING

COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO

AMEND;

GRANTING MOTION TO

PROCEED IN FORMA

PAUPERIS

INTRODUCTION

This is a civil rights action filed by a pro se state prisoner pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 

§ 1983. Plaintiff, a California state prisoner, alleges that he is receiving inadequate

medical care in violation of the Eighth Amendment while housed the San Francisco

County Jail. 

The Court now reviews the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a).

DISCUSSION

A. Standard of Review

A federal court must conduct a preliminary screening in any case in which a

prisoner seeks redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a

Case 3:09-cv-05435-RS Document 10 Filed 04/22/10 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

No. C 09-5435 RS (PR)

2 ORDER

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

any cognizable claims and dismiss any claims that 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. § 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. 1988). 

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, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1949

(2009) (quoting Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). “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.

(quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 556). Furthermore, a court “is not required to accept

legal conclusions cast in the form of factual allegations if those conclusions cannot

reasonably be drawn from the facts alleged.” Clegg v. Cult Awareness Network, 18 F.3d

752, 754–55 (9th Cir. 1994). 

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

elements: (1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was

violated, and (2) that the alleged violation was committed by a person acting under the

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

B. Legal Claims 

Plaintiff alleges that he is terminally ill, and that while housed at the San Francisco

County Jail hospital, defendants have “forced” him “off oxygen,” have disregarded his

emergency health care directives, and have subjected him to mistreatment in violation of

his Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. 

Plaintiff, however, fails to allege specific facts as to the acts or omissions allegedly

committed by specific defendants, although he lists many persons as defendants in the

caption. Without the names of specific defendants, an adequate description of the

specific acts each individual defendant allegedly committed, and how the alleged acts

violated his constitutional rights, the Court cannot determine whether plaintiff has stated

Case 3:09-cv-05435-RS Document 10 Filed 04/22/10 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

No. C 09-5435 RS (PR)

3 ORDER

claims for relief, nor, certainly, can it order service of the complaint.

Accordingly, the complaint is DISMISSED with leave to amend. Plaintiff must

file an amended complaint correcting the deficiencies described in this order within 30

days from the date this order is filed. Failure to file an amended complaint by such time

will result in dismissal of the action without further notice to plaintiff. 

The first amended complaint must include the caption and civil case number used

in this order (09-5435 RS (PR)) and the words FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT on the

first page. Because an amended complaint completely replaces the previous complaints,

plaintiff must include in his first amended complaint all the claims he wishes to present

and all of the defendants he wishes to sue. See Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1262

(9th Cir. 1992). Plaintiff may not incorporate material from the prior complaint by

reference. 

It is plaintiff’s responsibility to prosecute this case. Plaintiff must keep the Court

informed of any change of address by filing a separate paper with the clerk headed

“Notice of Change of Address.” He must comply with the Court’s orders in a timely

fashion or ask for an extension of time to do so. Failure to comply may result in the

dismissal of this action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). 

MOTIONS

Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Docket No. 8) is GRANTED. 

Plaintiff’s motion for the appointment of counsel (Docket No. 2) is DENIED as

premature, but without prejudice. Plaintiff may renew his request when he files his

amended complaint, or at any time after the amended complaint is filed. 

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, the Court orders as follows: 

1. The complaint is DISMISSED with leave to amend. Plaintiff must file an

amended complaint in compliance with the above instructions within 30 days of

the date this order is filed. Failure to file by such date will result in dismissal of

the action without further notice to plaintiff. 

Case 3:09-cv-05435-RS Document 10 Filed 04/22/10 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

No. C 09-5435 RS (PR)

4 ORDER

2. Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED. His motion for the

appointment of counsel is DENIED. 

3. This order terminates Docket Nos. 2 & 8. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: April 22, 2010 

 RICHARD SEEBORG

United States District Judge

Case 3:09-cv-05435-RS Document 10 Filed 04/22/10 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

No. C 09-5435 RS (PR)

5 ORDER

THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT A HARD COPY OF THIS ORDER WAS MAILED

TO:

T-03412 

S.V.S.P. - C.T.C. Hospital 

P. O. Box 1050 

Soledad, CA 93960 

DATED: 04/22/2010 

 s/ Chambers Staff 

Chambers of Judge Richard Seeborg

* Counsel are responsible for distributing copies of this document to any co-counsel who

have not registered with the Court’s electronic filing system.

Daniel Wolf Phillips

Case 3:09-cv-05435-RS Document 10 Filed 04/22/10 Page 5 of 5