Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-04806/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-04806-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
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

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ABBAS EGHTESADI,

Plaintiff,

v.

A. ADAMS, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 14-cv-04806-JCS (PR) 

ORDER DISMISSING THE

COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO 

AMEND

INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff, a California state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this federal civil 

rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in which he raises claims against medical staff at 

Soledad State Prison. After reviewing the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), the 

Court DISMISSES the complaint with leave to file an amended complaint on or before 

May 4, 2015.1 

DISCUSSION

A. Standard of Review

In its initial review of this pro se complaint, this Court must dismiss any claim that 

is frivolous or malicious, or fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted, or seeks 

monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief. See 28 U.S.C. 

 

1

Plaintiff consented to magistrate judge jurisdiction. (Compl. at 4.) The magistrate judge, 

then, has jurisdiction to issue this order, even though defendants have not been served or 

consented to magistrate judge jurisdiction. See Neals v. Norwood, 59 F.3d 530, 532 (5th 

Cir. 1995). 

Case 3:14-cv-04806-JCS Document 4 Filed 03/31/15 Page 1 of 5
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

§ 1915(e). Pro se pleadings must be liberally construed. See Balistreri v. Pacifica Police 

Dep’t, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1988). 

A “complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to „state a 

claim to relief that is plausible on its face.‟” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 1949 

(2009) (quoting Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). “A claim has 

facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the 

reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.” Id. (quoting 

Twombly, 550 U.S. at 556). Furthermore, a court “is not required to accept legal 

conclusions cast in the form of factual allegations if those conclusions cannot reasonably 

be drawn from the facts alleged.” Clegg v. Cult Awareness Network, 18 F.3d 752, 754–55 

(9th Cir. 1994). 

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two essential 

elements: (1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was 

violated, and (2) that the alleged violation was committed by a person acting under the 

color of state law. See West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988).

B. Legal Claims 

Plaintiff alleges that medical staff at Soledad State Prison, in particular S. Denia, a 

nurse, provided constitutionally inadequate medical care for his spine, resulting in 

continued pain and suffering. He alleges that he was deprived of his preferred pain 

medications (and at times, of any pain medication), an MRI, and a consultation with a 

specialist. 

A prison official is deliberately indifferent if he knows that a prisoner faces a 

substantial risk of serious harm and disregards that risk by failing to take reasonable steps 

to abate it. See Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 837 (1994). The prison official must 

not only “be aware of facts from which the inference could be drawn that a substantial risk 

of serious harm exists,” but “must also draw the inference.” Id. Consequently, in order for 

deliberate indifference to be established, there must exist both a purposeful act or failure to 

act on the part of the defendant and harm resulting therefrom. See McGuckin v. Smith, 974 

Case 3:14-cv-04806-JCS Document 4 Filed 03/31/15 Page 2 of 5
3

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

Northern District of California

F.2d 1050, 1060 (9th Cir. 1992). 

Under the Farmer standard, it appears that plaintiff has stated a claim that he has a 

serious medical condition that, in his opinion, was not treated properly. However, he fails 

to relate the alleged constitutional deprivation to the specific acts of specific persons. “A 

person deprives another „of a constitutional right, within the meaning of section 1983, if he 

does an affirmative act, participates in another‟s affirmative acts, or omits to perform an 

act which he is legally required to do that causes the deprivation of which [the plaintiff 

complains].” Leer v. Murphy, 844 F.2d 628, 633 (9th Cir. 1988) (quoting Johnson v. 

Duffy, 588 F.2d 740, 743 (9th Cir.1978)). The inquiry into causation must be 

individualized and focus on the duties and responsibilities of each individual defendant 

whose acts or omissions are alleged to have caused a constitutional deprivation. Id.

Plaintiff has not met the Leer standard. Specifically, he has not alleged specific 

facts showing a causative link between the duties and responsibilities of particular 

defendants to particular acts. As noted above, the Farmer standard requires that a prison 

official have acted or failed to act and that harm resulted from this act or failure. Plaintiff 

must provide such allegations, including specific details as to the action of each defendant 

(including names, dates, statements made), what treatment was provided by which 

defendant or person and why that treatment was constitutionally inadequate. Plaintiff will 

be given an opportunity to address these concerns. Accordingly, the complaint will be 

dismissed with leave to amend. 

CONCLUSION

The complaint is DISMISSED with leave to amend. Plaintiff shall file an 

amended complaint on or before May 4, 2015. The first amended complaint must 

include the caption and civil case number used in this order (14-4806 JCS (PR)) and the 

words FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT on the first page. It must address all deficiencies 

discussed above. Because an amended complaint completely replaces the previous 

complaints, plaintiff must include in his first amended complaint all the claims he wishes 

to present and all of the defendants he wishes to sue. See Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 

Case 3:14-cv-04806-JCS Document 4 Filed 03/31/15 Page 3 of 5
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

1258, 1262 (9th Cir. 1992). Plaintiff may not incorporate material from the prior 

complaint by reference. Failure to file an amended complaint in accordance with this 

order will result in dismissal of this action without further notice to plaintiff. 

It is plaintiff‟s responsibility to prosecute this case. Plaintiff must keep the Court 

informed of any change of address by filing a separate paper with the clerk headed “Notice 

of Change of Address.” He must comply with the Court‟s orders in a timely fashion or ask 

for an extension of time to do so. Failure to comply may result in the dismissal of this 

action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). 

The Court notes that the filing fee has been paid. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 31, 2015

_________________________

 JOSEPH C. SPERO

 Chief United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:14-cv-04806-JCS Document 4 Filed 03/31/15 Page 4 of 5
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

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ABBAS EGHTESADI,

Plaintiff,

v.

A. ADAMS, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 14-cv-04806-JCS 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. 

District Court, Northern District of California.

That on 3/31/2015, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing said 

copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by depositing 

said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery receptacle 

located in the Clerk's office.

Abbas Eghtesadi ID: T-87986

Correctional Training Facility

P.O. Box 705

Soledad, CA 93960 

Dated: 3/31/2015

Richard W. Wieking

Clerk, United States District Court

By:________________________

Karen Hom, Deputy Clerk to the 

Honorable JOSEPH C. SPERO

Case 3:14-cv-04806-JCS Document 4 Filed 03/31/15 Page 5 of 5