Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_23-cv-01240/USCOURTS-caed-2_23-cv-01240-1/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 

DYLAN CORRAL, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

UNKNOWN, 

Defendants. 

No. 2:23-cv-01240-DJC-EFB (PC) 

ORDER 

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 

U.S.C. § 1983. In addition to filing a complaint, he has filed an application to proceed in forma 

pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. The court will grant the in forma pauperis application and 

screen the complaint. 

Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis 

 Plaintiff’s application makes the showing required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1) and (2). 

Accordingly, by separate order, the court directs the agency having custody of plaintiff to collect 

and forward the appropriate monthly payments for the filing fee as set forth in 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1915(b)(1) and (2). 

Screening Standards 

 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. 28 U.S.C. 

Case 2:23-cv-01240-DJC-EFB Document 8 Filed 12/20/23 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 

2 

§ 1915A(a). The court must identify cognizable claims or dismiss the complaint, or any portion 

of the complaint, if the complaint “is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which 

relief may be granted,” or “seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such 

relief.” Id. § 1915A(b). 

 A pro se plaintiff, like other litigants, must satisfy the pleading requirements of Rule 8(a) 

of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Rule 8(a)(2) “requires a complaint to include 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, 554, 562-563 (2007) (citing Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41 (1957)). 

While the complaint must comply with the “short and plaint statement” requirements of Rule 8, 

its allegations must also include the specificity required by Twombly and Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 

U.S. 662, 679 (2009). 

 To avoid dismissal for failure to state a claim a complaint must contain more than “naked 

assertions,” “labels and conclusions” or “a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of 

action.” Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555-557. In other words, “[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of 

a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements do not suffice.” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 

678. 

 Furthermore, a claim upon which the court can grant relief must have facial plausibility. 

Twombly, 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.” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678. When considering whether a complaint states a 

claim upon which relief can be granted, the court must accept the allegations as true, Erickson v. 

Pardus, 551 U.S. 89 (2007), and construe the complaint in the light most favorable to the 

plaintiff, see Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 236 (1974). 

Screening Order 

 Plaintiff alleges that, on July 7, 2019, two unidentified correctional officers caused the 

loss of his legal property during his transfer from High Desert State Prison to Mule Creek State 

Prison in retaliation for his civil rights and habeas corpus litigation. ECF No. 1. 

Case 2:23-cv-01240-DJC-EFB Document 8 Filed 12/20/23 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 

3 

“[P]ursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 10, a caption to a complaint must include the names of all 

parties.” Culp v. Williams, No. 10-cv-00886-CMA-CBS, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46601, 2011 

WL 1597686, at *3 (D. Colo. Apr. 27, 2011), aff'd, 456 F. App'x 718 (10th Cir. 2012). The 

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure “do not explicitly allow the naming of fictitious or anonymous 

parties in a lawsuit,” thus, “an action may be dismissed if the defendant is not sufficiently 

identified to permit service of process.” Id. (quotation omitted). 

 Plaintiff must use administrative processes available at his institution to obtain the names 

of the two correctional officers he sues as John Does. The court cannot order service on an 

unknown party. Accordingly, the court will dismiss plaintiff’s complaint with leave to file an 

amended complaint identifying at least one defendant. If plaintiff cannot determine the identity 

of any defendant, he must inform the court of what efforts he has undertaken to do so. 

Leave to Amend 

 Plaintiff may choose to amend his complaint. He is cautioned that any amended 

complaint must identify as a defendant only persons who personally participated in a substantial 

way in depriving him of his constitutional rights. Johnson v. Duffy, 588 F.2d 740, 743 (9th Cir. 

1978) (a person subjects another to the deprivation of a constitutional right if he does an act, 

participates in another’s act or omits to perform an act he is legally required to do that causes the 

alleged deprivation). Plaintiff may also include any allegations based on state law that are so 

closely related to his federal allegations that “they form the same case or controversy.” See 28 

U.S.C. § 1367(a). 

 The amended complaint must also contain a caption including the names of all defendants. 

Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(a). 

 Plaintiff may not change the nature of this suit by alleging new, unrelated claims. See 

George v. Smith, 507 F.3d 605, 607 (7th Cir. 2007). Nor may he bring unrelated claims against 

multiple defendants. Id. 

 Any amended complaint must be written or typed so that it so that it is complete in itself 

without reference to any earlier filed complaint. E.D. Cal. L.R. 220. This is because an amended 

complaint supersedes any earlier filed complaint, and once an amended complaint is filed, the 

Case 2:23-cv-01240-DJC-EFB Document 8 Filed 12/20/23 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 

4 

earlier filed complaint no longer serves any function in the case. See Forsyth v. Humana, 114 

F.3d 1467, 1474 (9th Cir. 1997) (the “‘amended complaint supersedes the original, the latter

being treated thereafter as non-existent.’”) (quoting Loux v. Rhay, 375 F.2d 55, 57 (9th Cir.

1967)).

Conclusion 

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that: 

1. Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 6) is GRANTED.

2. Plaintiff shall pay the statutory filing fee of $350. All payments shall be collected

in accordance with the notice to the Sacramento County Sheriff’s Department filed concurrently 

herewith. 

3. Plaintiff’s complaint (ECF No. 1) is dismissed with leave to amend within 30 days

of service of this order. If plaintiff cannot determine the identity of any defendant within that 

time period, he must file with the court a notice describing the efforts he has made to do so, also 

within 30 days of service of this order. 

4. Failure to comply with this order may result in dismissal of this action.

Dated: December 19, 2023 

Case 2:23-cv-01240-DJC-EFB Document 8 Filed 12/20/23 Page 4 of 4