Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-00998/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-00998-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FRANKLIN RAY BROWN,

Plaintiff,

v.

COUNTY OF FRESNO, et al.

Defendants.

1:14-cv-00998---GSA

ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT

WITH LEAVE TO AMEND

(ECF No. 1)

I. INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff Franklin Brown (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint (the “Complaint”) against a 

number of parties associated with Fresno County on June 26, 2014. (ECF No. 1.) The Complaint 

alleges a single cause of action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the County of Fresno, Elizabeth 

Egan, Kevin Briggs, Trace Meador, Juan P. Rodriguez, and Stephanie Renteria.1 As discussed 

below, the Complaint will be dismissed because it fails to state a claim. Plaintiff is granted leave 

to file an amended complaint.

II. DISCUSSION

a. Legal Standard

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), the Court must conduct an initial review of the Complaint 

to determine whether it “state[s] a claim on which relief may be granted,” is “frivolous or 

 

1 Each of the individual defendants appears to be employed in some capacity by Fresno County. Plaintiff claims that 

Egan and Renteria are both employed at the Fresno County District Attorney‟s office, Briggs and Rodriguez are 

employed at the Fresno County Counsel‟s office, and Meador works for “risk management.”

Case 1:14-cv-00998-LJO-SMS Document 5 Filed 04/16/15 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

malicious,” or “seek[s] monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief.” If 

the Court determines that the Complaint fails to state a claim, it must be dismissed. Id. Leave to 

amend may be granted to the extent that the deficiencies of the Complaint can be cured by 

amendment. Cato v. United States, 70 F.3d 1103, 1106 (9th Cir. 1995). 

A complaint must contain “a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the 

pleader is entitled to relief . . . .” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). Detailed factual allegations are not 

required, but “[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere 

conclusory statements, do not suffice.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (citing Bell 

Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 1964-65 (2007)). Plaintiff must set 

forth “sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to „state a claim that is plausible on its face.‟” 

Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 663 (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555). While factual allegations 

are accepted as true, legal conclusions are not. Id. at 678.

To determine whether a complaint states an actionable claim, the Court must accept the 

allegations in the complaint as true, Hosp. Bldg. Co. v. Trs. of Rex Hosp., 425 U.S. 738, 740 

(1976), construe pro se pleadings liberally in the light most favorable to the Plaintiff, Resnick v. 

Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000), and resolve all doubts in the Plaintiff‟s favor. Jenkins 

v. McKeithen, 395 U.S. 411, 421 (1969). Pleadings of pro se plaintiffs “must be held to less 

stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers.” Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 342 

(9th Cir. 2010) (holding that pro se complaints should continue to be liberally construed after 

Iqbal). 

b. Plaintiff’s Allegations

Plaintiff‟s Complaint contains few factual allegations. At some point in 2010, Plaintiff 

apparently filed a civil lawsuit against the Fresno County District Attorney‟s office as a result of a 

plea bargain he had entered into in a criminal case. In the course of that litigation, Plaintiff alleges 

that “Defendants . . . participated in a Civil Conspiracy which includes fraud, perjury, document 

fraud, obstruction of justice.” Complaint ¶ 16. He concludes by stating that each of the individual 

defendants “had constructive knowledge of the Civil Rights violation against plaintiff.” 

Complaint ¶¶ 19-23. Plaintiff states that his rights under the First Amendment were violated by 

Case 1:14-cv-00998-LJO-SMS Document 5 Filed 04/16/15 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

Defendants. Complaint ¶¶ 29, 34, 40, 56. He does not explain what “Civil Rights violation” the 

Defendants committed, nor does he explain what actions constituted a “Civil Conspiracy” against 

him.

c. Analysis of Plaintiff’s Allegations

To state a claim under § 1983, a plaintiff “must allege a violation of a right secured by the 

Constitution and laws of the United States, and must show that the alleged deprivation was 

committed by a person acting under color of state law.” West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988).

Rule 8(a) additionally requires that each complaint contain “a short and plain statement of the 

claim showing the pleader is entitled to relief.” Detailed factual allegations are not required, but 

“[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory 

statements, do not suffice.” Iqbal, 550 U.S. at 555. It is not enough to merely conclude that these 

elements have been met; a plaintiff must provide facts sufficient to state a plausible claim under 

these elements. 

Plaintiff has not stated facts sufficient to state a plausible violation of § 1983. Although it 

is apparent that Plaintiff believes Defendants engaged in some wrongdoing with respect to his 

civil suit against the District Attorney, it is not clear what each of the Defendants did or even 

whether they played a role in Plaintiff‟s civil suit. The Complaint cannot proceed without some 

factual basis for each defendant‟s liability. 

III. LEAVE TO AMEND

The Court will provide Plaintiff an opportunity to amend the Complaint to fix the issues 

identified above. If Plaintiff chooses to file a First Amended Complaint, it must bear the docket 

number assigned in this case and be labeled “First Amended Complaint.” As a general rule, an 

amended complaint supersedes the original complaint. Lacey v. Maricopa Cnty., 693 F.3d 896 

(9th Cir. 2012) (noting that there may be limited exceptions to this rule on appeal). In other 

words, the amended complaint must be “complete in itself without reference to the prior or 

superseded pleading.” Local Rule 220. 

IV. ORDER

For the reasons set forth above, Plaintiff‟s Complaint is DISMISSED WITH LEAVE TO 

Case 1:14-cv-00998-LJO-SMS Document 5 Filed 04/16/15 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

AMEND. Plaintiff is instructed to consider the standards set forth in this Order and should only 

file an amended complaint if he believes his claims are cognizable. Any amended complaint shall 

be filed no later than May 18, 2015. Failure to file an amended complaint by the date specified 

will result in dismissal of this action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 16, 2015 /s/ Gary S. Austin 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-00998-LJO-SMS Document 5 Filed 04/16/15 Page 4 of 4