Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01697/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01697-4/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MONICO J. QUIROGA,

Plaintiff,

v.

TIMOTHY KING, et al.,

Defendants.

CASE NO. 1:15-cv-01697-AWI-MJS

(PC)

ORDER DENYING WITHOUT 

PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF’S MOTION 

TO SUBMIT EVIDENCE TO PROVE 

HARASSMENT

(ECF No. 12)

Plaintiff Monico J. Quiroga, a prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, 

filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on November 9, 2015. (ECF No. 

1.) He brings this suit against Defendants Timothy King, C. Chapa, C. Bernard, O. 

Fuentos, and Gauze, all agents of the Kern County Sherriff’s Office, for claims arising

while he was in the custody of the Kern County Sherriff’s Office. Plaintiff has declined 

Magistrate Judge jurisdiction in this case. (ECF No. 6.) No other parties have appeared in 

the action.

Plaintiff’s second amended complaint is awaiting screening by the Court. (ECF 

No. 20.) Before the Court is Plaintiff’s February 22, 2016 “motion to submit evidence to 

prove harassment.” (ECF No. 12.) Plaintiff seeks to admit what he deems evidence 

proving the alleged harassment of Plaintiff by Defendants. Plaintiff states Officers 

Case 1:15-cv-01697-AWI-HBK Document 25 Filed 08/22/16 Page 1 of 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

2

Theodore King and Johnny Moreno of the Kern County Sherriff’s Office charged Plaintiff 

with a felony while he was in custody. He attaches to his motion what appears to one 

page of an arrest report charging various offenses. Plaintiff’s name appears nowhere on 

the form.

It is unclear what Plaintiff seeks to do with the proffered evidence. To the extent 

Plaintiff wishes supplement his civil rights complaint with additional factual allegations or 

claims, Plaintiff is advised that a civil rights complaint must be “complete in and of itself 

without reference to any other pleading, attachment, or document.” Micenheimer v. Soto, 

No. CV 13-3853-CJC (JEM), 2014 WL 2931111 (C.D. Cal. June 27, 2014); see also

Lacey v. Maricopa County, 693 F.3d 896, 907 n.1 (9th Cir. 2012) (en banc). Any and all 

causes of action and supporting facts must be contained within his civil rights complaint.

To the extent Plaintiff wishes to “prove” the claims contained within his civil rights 

complaint, Plaintiff is reminded that at the pleading stage, all factual allegations are taken 

as true. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (“[A] court must accept as true all of 

the allegations contained in a complaint.”) Plaintiff need not submit evidence in order to 

prove his allegations at point in the proceedings.

Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff’s motion to submit evidence of harassment is 

HEREBY DENIED without prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 22, 2016 /s/Michael J. Seng 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-01697-AWI-HBK Document 25 Filed 08/22/16 Page 2 of 2