Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_21-cv-02341/USCOURTS-caed-2_21-cv-02341-0/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

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KWESI MUHAMMAD,

Plaintiff,

v.

CDCR, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 2:21-cv-02341-TLN-JDP (PC)

SCREENING ORDER THAT PLAINTIFF:

(1) STAND BY HIS COMPLAINT 

SUBJECT TO A 

RECOMMENDATION OF 

DISMISSAL OF CLAIMS AND 

PARTIES, OR

(2) FILE AN AMENDED 

COMPLAINT

ECF No. 1

THIRTY-DAY DEADLINE

Plaintiff, a state prisoner, alleges that defendants violated his rights under the Americans 

with Disabilities Act, Eighth Amendment, and the Fourteenth Amendment by failing, in various 

ways, to protect him from Covid-19 and to treat him once he contracted the virus. ECF No. 1-1 at 

18-21. This suit was originally filed in California state court and removed by defendant 

California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (“CDCR”). I have screened the 

complaint and determined that the complaint contains multiple, unrelated claims against more 

Case 2:21-cv-02341-TLN-JDP Document 7 Filed 06/22/22 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

than one defendant.1 I will grant plaintiff an opportunity to amend and narrow his claims before 

recommending dismissal of claims or parties. 

Screening Order

I. Screening and Pleading Requirements

A federal court must screen a prisoner’s complaint that seeks relief against a governmental 

entity, officer, or employee. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The court must identify any cognizable 

claims and dismiss any portion of the complaint that is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a 

claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is 

immune from such relief. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915A(b)(1), (2).

A complaint must contain a short and plain statement that plaintiff is entitled to relief, 

Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2), and provide “enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its 

face,” Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007). The plausibility standard does not 

require detailed allegations, but legal conclusions do not suffice. See Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 

662, 678 (2009). If the allegations “do not permit the court to infer more than the mere 

possibility of misconduct,” the complaint states no claim. Id. at 679. The complaint need not 

identify “a precise legal theory.” Kobold v. Good Samaritan Reg’l Med. Ctr., 832 F.3d 1024, 

1038 (9th Cir. 2016). Instead, what plaintiff must state is a “claim”—a set of “allegations that 

give rise to an enforceable right to relief.” Nagrampa v. MailCoups, Inc., 469 F.3d 1257, 1264 

n.2 (9th Cir. 2006) (en banc) (citations omitted). 

The court must construe a pro se litigant’s complaint liberally. See Haines v. Kerner, 404 

U.S. 519, 520 (1972) (per curiam). The court may dismiss a pro se litigant’s complaint “if it 

appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which 

would entitle him to relief.” Hayes v. Idaho Corr. Ctr., 849 F.3d 1204, 1208 (9th Cir. 2017). 

However, “‘a liberal interpretation of a civil rights complaint may not supply essential elements 

1 My obligation to screen the complaint still adheres where a complaint is filed in and then 

removed from state court. See, e.g., Walker v. Departmental Review Bd., No. 2:17-cv-02191-ACP, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 176242, *3 (E.D. Cal. Oct. 2017) (“The screening obligation applies 

where a complaint is removed from state court.”). The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure also 

apply once an action is removed. Fed. R. Civ. P. 81(c)(1) (“These rules apply to a civil action 

after it is removed from a state court.”). 

Case 2:21-cv-02341-TLN-JDP Document 7 Filed 06/22/22 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

of the claim that were not initially pled.’” Bruns v. Nat’l Credit Union Admin., 122 F.3d 1251, 

1257 (9th Cir. 1997) (quoting Ivey v. Bd. of Regents, 673 F.2d 266, 268 (9th Cir. 1982)).

II. Analysis

Plaintiff raises several unrelated allegations against CDCR and various “Doe” defendants 

at the California Treatment Facility. ECF No. 1-1 at 5. First, he alleges that they violated his 

rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act by failing to provide him with a mask that would 

not “fog” and obscure his eyeglasses. Id. at 18. Second, he claims that, once he contracted 

Covid-19, he was not provided with sufficient treatment to alleviate his symptoms. Id. at 19-20. 

Third, he alleges that defendants failed to take precautionary measures to stop the spread of 

Covid-19 at the prison. Id. at 20. Specifically, plaintiff takes issue with defendants’ alleged 

failure to promote social distancing in the facility showers. Id. at 20-21. These three claims are 

insufficiently related to proceed together. Whether defendants violated plaintiff’s rights by 

failing to give him a mask that would not obscure his glasses is unrelated to the question of 

whether there was adequate separation for showering inmates. The first claim is focused on the 

narrow issue of whether the ADA entitles him to a certain type of mask. The second is a broader 

claim about how defendants organized their prison-wide response to the pandemic. The claims 

invoke different factual and legal questions and litigating them jointly is untenable. The same is 

true of plaintiff’s claim about the inadequate healthcare he allegedly received. Those allegations 

will necessarily focus on specific medical questions that do not inform the other claims. The 

bottom line is that multiple, unrelated claims against more than one defendant belong in separate 

lawsuits. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 18(a); George v. Smith, 507 F.3d 605, 607 (7th Cir. 2007) (“Thus 

multiple claims against a single party are fine, but Claim A against Defendant 1 should not be 

joined with unrelated Claim B against Defendant 2.”).

Plaintiff is also advised that he may not bring claims for money damages, as he attempts 

to do, against CDCR itself. See Brown v. California Dept. Of Corr., 554 F.3d 747, 752 (9th Cir. 

2009). Further, I cannot serve any “Doe” defendant until he or she is identified. 

If plaintiff decides to file an amended complaint, the amended complaint will supersede 

the current complaint. See Lacey v. Maricopa County, 693 F. 3d 896, 907 n.1 (9th Cir. 2012) (en 

Case 2:21-cv-02341-TLN-JDP Document 7 Filed 06/22/22 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

banc). This means that the amended complaint will need to be complete on its face without 

reference to the prior pleading. See E.D. Cal. Local Rule 220. Once an amended complaint is 

filed, the current complaint no longer serves any function. Therefore, in an amended complaint, 

as in an original complaint, plaintiff will need to assert each claim and allege each defendant’s 

involvement in sufficient detail. The amended complaint should be titled “Amended Complaint” 

and refer to the appropriate case number. If plaintiff does not file an amended complaint, I will 

recommend that claims or parties be dismissed. 

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that:

1. Within thirty days from the service of this order, plaintiff must either file an Amended 

Complaint or advise the court he wishes to stand by his current complaint. If he selects the latter 

option, I will recommend that claims or parties be dismissed. 

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

3. The Clerk of Court is directed to send plaintiff a complaint form.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 21, 2022 

JEREMY D. PETERSON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:21-cv-02341-TLN-JDP Document 7 Filed 06/22/22 Page 4 of 4