Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-00817/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-00817-0/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JULIUS CARTER ANDERSON,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-03-0817 MCE KJM P

vs.

W. HARTLEY, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff is a prisoner who is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis. Plaintiff

seeks relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

On April 12, 2004, the court ordered, under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b), that plaintiff’s

complaint be served on defendants Hernandez and Hartley. Hernandez and Hartley were served

and on September 1, 2004 filed a motion to dismiss. In response to the motion to dismiss,

plaintiff filed a motion for leave to file an amended complaint and a proposed amended

complaint.

/////

/////

/////

/////

Case 2:03-cv-00817-MCE -KJM Document 23 Filed 09/30/05 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

1

 Plaintiff asserts violations of rights arising under the Americans with Disabilities Act

(ADA). There are several problems with plaintiff’s ADA claims; most notably, plaintiff fails to

allege that, because of a disability, he has been excluded from participation in, or denied the

benefits of services, programs, or activities of a public entity, or subjected to discrimination. See

42 U.S.C. § 12132. 

2

 As noted above, defendant Hernandez already has been served with process and has

appeared in this action. Plaintiff will be directed to serve him with the amended complaint, as

required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.

2

Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a) a party may file an amended

complaint at any time before a responsive pleading is filed. Accordingly, defendants’

September 1 motion to dismiss will be denied and plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend will be

granted. See Nolen v. Fitzharris, 450 F.2d 958, 958 (9th Cir. 1971) (motion to dismiss not a

“responsive pleading” under Rule 15(a)).

Defendants Hernandez and Hartley have filed a second motion to dismiss

plaintiff’s amended complaint. The court will deny defendants’ motion as the court must first

screen plaintiff’s amended complaint. 

Specifically, the court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners

seeking relief against a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity

under 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 reviewing plaintiff’s amended complaint, the court finds that the amended

complaint states Eighth Amendment claims against defendants Hernandez, Morrison and Pai,

and a First Amendment retaliation claim against defendant Pai. The other claims in the amended

complaint fail to state claims upon which relief can be granted.1 Accordingly, the court will

order service of process on defendants Morrison and Pai,2 but not on the other defendants

identified in plaintiff’s amended complaint.

Case 2:03-cv-00817-MCE -KJM Document 23 Filed 09/30/05 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

3

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

1. The September 1, 2004 motion to dismiss brought by defendants Hernandez

and Hartley is denied without prejudice.

2. Plaintiff’s September 17, 2004 motion for leave to file an amended complaint

is granted, and the amended complaint is deemed filed as of September 17, 2004.

3. The September 20, 2004 motion to dismiss brought by defendants Hernandez

and Hartley is denied without prejudice.

4. Service of plaintiff’s amended complaint is appropriate for defendants

Morrison and Pai.

5. The Clerk of the Court shall send plaintiff two USM-285 forms, one summons,

an instruction sheet and a copy of the amended complaint filed September 17, 2004.

6. 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 4

above; and 

d. Three copies of the endorsed amended complaint filed September 17,

2004. 

7. Plaintiff need not attempt service on defendants Morrison and Pai 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 under Federal Rule of Civil

Procedure 4 without payment of costs. 

8. Plaintiff shall serve defendant Hernandez with the amended complaint as

required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.

/////

Case 2:03-cv-00817-MCE -KJM Document 23 Filed 09/30/05 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

4

9. Defendant Hernandez need not take any action with respect to this matter until

informed to do so by the court.

DATED: September 30, 2005.

______________________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

1/ande0817.1

Case 2:03-cv-00817-MCE -KJM Document 23 Filed 09/30/05 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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JULIUS CARTER ANDERSON,

Plaintiff, No. CIV-S-03-0817 MCE KJM P 

vs.

W. HARTLEY, et al., NOTICE OF SUBMISSION

Defendants. 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 

 Amended Complaint

DATED: 

 

Plaintiff 

Case 2:03-cv-00817-MCE -KJM Document 23 Filed 09/30/05 Page 5 of 5