Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_16-cv-06667/USCOURTS-cand-4_16-cv-06667-0/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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BENDY A. FALLA,

Plaintiff,

v.

L. EDWARDS,

Defendant.

Case No. 16-cv-06667-HSG (PR) 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Plaintiff, a California prisoner incarcerated at Pelican Bay State Prison (“PBSP”), filed this 

pro se civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff has been granted leave to proceed in 

forma pauperis in a separate order. His complaint is now before the Court for review under 28 

U.S.C. § 1915A. 

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 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 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1), 

(2). Pro se pleadings must, however, be liberally construed. See Balistreri v. Pacifica Police 

Dep’t., 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1988). 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2) requires only “a short and plain statement of the 

claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” “Specific facts are not necessary; the 

statement need only “‘give the defendant fair notice of what the . . . claim is and the grounds upon 

Case 4:16-cv-06667-HSG Document 6 Filed 01/03/17 Page 1 of 3
2

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

Northern District of California

which it rests.’” Erickson v. Pardus, 127 S. Ct. 2197, 2200 (2007) (citations omitted). Although 

in order to state a claim a complaint “does not need detailed factual allegations, . . . a plaintiff’s 

obligation to provide the grounds of his ‘entitle[ment] to relief’ requires more than labels and 

conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do. . . . 

Factual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level.” Bell 

Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 127 S. Ct. 1955, 1964-65 (2007) (citations omitted). A complaint 

must proffer “enough facts to state a claim for relief that is plausible on its face.” Id. at 1974. 

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 on January 4, 2016, while at PBSP, he had a scheduled telephonic 

court hearing pertaining to a child custody case pending in Los Angeles County Superior Court. 

Defendant PBSP correctional counselor L. Edwards was responsible for providing inmates 

telephone access to attend court proceedings telephonically from PBSP. On this day, however, 

Defendant Edwards failed to provide Plaintiff with telephone access. As a result of Plaintiff 

missing the scheduled hearing, the Los Angeles County Superior Court terminated Plaintiff’s 

parental rights and imposed sanctions. Plaintiff asserts a claim for denial of access to the courts.

Prisoners have a constitutional right of access to the courts. Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343, 

350 (1996). To establish a claim for any violation of the right of access to the courts, the prisoner 

must prove that there was an inadequacy in the prison’s legal access program that caused him an 

actual injury. See Lewis, 518 U.S. at 350-55. To prove an actual injury, the prisoner must show 

that the inadequacy hindered him in presenting a non-frivolous claim concerning his conviction or 

conditions of confinement. See id. at 354-55. The right of access does not extend to litigation 

other than Section 1983 claims and direct and collateral challenges to convictions and sentences. 

Id. at 355. “Impairment of any other litigating capacity is simply one of the incidental (and 

perfectly constitutional) consequences of conviction and incarceration.” Id.

Case 4:16-cv-06667-HSG Document 6 Filed 01/03/17 Page 2 of 3
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

Plaintiff’s allegation that he was prevented from attending his child custody case 

telephonically does not state a cognizable Section 1983 claim for denial of access to the courts. 

Even if the denial caused an actual injury to his ability to litigate that case, he would have no 

constitutional claim because the case had nothing to do with a challenge to his conviction or 

conditions of confinement. See id.; see also Simmons v. Sacramento County Superior Court, 318 

F.3d 1156, 1159-60 (9th Cir. 2003) (state official’s refusal to transport prisoner to court for a state 

civil trial that is unrelated to the cause or conditions of the detention does not violate prisoner’s 

constitutional right of access to the courts). The right of access does not extend to child custody 

cases. The claim is DISMISSED without leave to amend. However, the dismissal is without 

prejudice to re-filing in state court based on an alleged violation of state law.

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, this action is DISMISSED for failure to state a claim upon 

which relief may be granted. The Clerk shall terminate all pending motions, enter judgment, and 

close the file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:

HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR.

United States District Judge

1/3/2017

Case 4:16-cv-06667-HSG Document 6 Filed 01/03/17 Page 3 of 3