Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-00645/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-00645-1/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

MICHAEL C. PEARSON,

Plaintiff,

v.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:14-cv-0645 MCE CKD P

ORDER AND 

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se. Plaintiff seeks relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 

§ 1983 and has requested leave to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. This 

proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 302 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

Plaintiff has submitted a declaration that makes the showing required by 28 U.S.C. § 

1915(a). Accordingly, the request to proceed in forma pauperis will be granted. 

Plaintiff is required to pay the statutory filing fee of $350.00 for this action. 28 U.S.C. §§ 

1914(a), 1915(b)(1). By separate order, the court will direct the appropriate agency to collect the 

initial partial filing fee from plaintiff’s trust account and forward it to the Clerk of the Court. 

Thereafter, plaintiff will be obligated for monthly payments of twenty percent of the preceding 

month’s income credited to plaintiff’s prison trust account. These payments will be forwarded by 

the appropriate agency to the Clerk of the Court each time the amount in plaintiff’s account 

exceeds $10.00, until the filing fee is paid in full. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2).

Case 2:14-cv-00645-MCE-CKD Document 8 Filed 04/25/14 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

The court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against a 

governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The 

court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are legally 

“frivolous or malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek 

monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1),(2). 

After screening plaintiff’s complaint, the court finds that plaintiff could prevail on claims 

arising under the Eighth Amendment against defendants Derocco, Hinrichs, Guzman, Sacks, 

Lidge and Daly concerning termination of plaintiff’s single cell status and denial of adequate 

mental health care. As for the other defendants and claims identified in his complaint, plaintiff 

fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. 

In plaintiff’s other primary claim, he asserts he was injured when he fell from a moving 

golf cart after he fainted and while he was handcuffed and wearing leg restraints. He asserts that 

the operators of the golf cart violated his Eighth Amendment right to be free from cruel and 

unusual punishment because they did not make sure plaintiff was restrained on the golf cart by 

seatbelts. However, plaintiff fails to state a claim under the Eighth Amendment because he fails 

to point to facts suggesting that the correctional officers’ failure to utilize seat belts amounted to 

deliberate indifference to a substantial risk of serious physical harm. See Farmer v. Brennan, 511 

U.S. 825, 833-34 (1994). Most notably, there are no facts suggesting the operators of the golf 

cart knew that plaintiff was faint as he rode on the cart. At most, the facts alleged amount to 

negligence which is not actionable under the Eighth Amendment. 

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 2) is granted.

2. Plaintiff is obligated to pay the statutory filing fee of $350.00 for this action. All fees 

shall be collected and paid in accordance with this court’s order to the Director of the California 

Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation filed concurrently herewith.

3. Service is appropriate for defendants Derocco, Guzman, Sacks, Lidge, Hinrichs and 

Daly.

/////

Case 2:14-cv-00645-MCE-CKD Document 8 Filed 04/25/14 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

4. The Clerk of the Court shall send plaintiff six USM-285 forms, one summons, an 

instruction sheet and a copy of the complaint.

5. Within thirty days from the date of this order, plaintiff shall complete the attached 

Notice of Submission of Documents and submit the following documents to the court:

a. The completed Notice of Submission of Documents;

b. One completed summons;

c. One completed USM-285 form for each defendant listed in number 3 above; 

and 

d. Seven copies of the endorsed complaint. 

6. Plaintiff need not attempt service on defendants and need not request waiver of service. 

Upon receipt of the above-described documents, the court will direct the United States Marshal to 

serve the above-named defendants pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4 without payment 

of costs.

IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that defendants the State of California, the California 

Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Beard, Virga, Rist and Hom be dismissed.

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 

after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 

with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings 

and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified 

time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 

(9th Cir. 1991).

Dated: April 25, 2014

1

pear0645.1

_____________________________________

CAROLYN K. DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:14-cv-00645-MCE-CKD Document 8 Filed 04/25/14 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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL C. PEARSON,

Plaintiff,

v.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al.,

Defendant.

No. 2:14-cv-0645 MCE CKD P

NOTICE OF SUBMISSION OF 

DOCUMENTS

Plaintiff hereby submits the following documents in compliance with the court's order 

filed _____________________:

____ completed summons form

____ completed USM-285 forms

____ copies of the ___________________ 

 Complaint

DATED: 

________________________________ 

Plaintiff

Case 2:14-cv-00645-MCE-CKD Document 8 Filed 04/25/14 Page 4 of 4