Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-3_10-cv-08060/USCOURTS-azd-3_10-cv-08060-1/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

JDDL

WO MDR

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Jessie Lewis, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Director Charles Lee Ryan, et al., 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 10-8060-PCT-MHM (DKD)

ORDER

On April 16, 2010, Plaintiff Jessie Lewis, who is confined in the Arizona State Prison

Complex-Picacho in Picacho, Arizona, filed a pro se civil rights Complaint pursuant to 42

U.S.C. § 1983 (Doc. #1) and a Letter. In an April 28, 2010 Order, the Court noted that

Plaintiff had not paid the $350.00 civil action filing fee or filed an Application to Proceed

In Forma Pauperis. The Court gave Plaintiff 30 days to either pay the filing fee or file a

complete Application to Proceed.

On April 29, 2010, Plaintiff filed a “Motion for an Order for Service Packet”

(Doc. #5). On May 3, 2010, Plaintiff paid the filing fee. 

I. Statutory Screening of Prisoner Complaints

The Court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against

a governmental entity or an officer or an employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915A(a). The Court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if a plaintiff has raised

claims that are legally frivolous or malicious, that fail to state a claim upon which relief may

Case 3:10-cv-08060-MHM--DKD Document 7 Filed 05/20/10 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

27

28

JDDL - 2 -

be granted, or that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief.

28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1), (2). 

Local Rule of Civil Procedure 3.4(a) requires in part that “[a]ll complaints . . . by

incarcerated persons shall be signed and legibly written or typewritten on forms approved

by the Court and in accordance with the instructions provided with the forms.” Plaintiff’s

Complaint violates the “one claim per count” rule that is set forth in the form Complaint and

accompanying instructions. Plaintiff’s Complaint consists of three counts which assert far

more than three claims. For example, in Count One, Plaintiff raises claims of “Freedom of

Religion, Prejudice, Discrimination, Due Process Clause, Equal Protection Clause, Free

Exercise Clause First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.” In addition to these issues,

Plaintiff also appears to assert a claim of retaliation in Count One. Plaintiff’s Complaint will

therefore be dismissed without prejudice, with leave to amend, in order for Plaintiff to file

an amended complaint that complies with Local Rule of Civil Procedure 3.4(a).

II. Leave to Amend

Within 30 days, Plaintiff may submit a first amended complaint to cure the

deficiencies outlined above. The Clerk of Court will mail Plaintiff a court-approved form

to use for filing a first amended complaint. If Plaintiff fails to use the court-approved form,

the Court may strike the amended complaint and dismiss this action without further notice

to Plaintiff.

Plaintiff must clearly designate on the face of the document that it is the “First

Amended Complaint.” The first amended complaint must be retyped or rewritten in its

entirety on the court-approved form and may not incorporate any part of the original

Complaint by reference. Plaintiff may include only one claim per count.

In an amended complaint, Plaintiff must write short, plain statements telling the Court:

(1) the constitutional right Plaintiff believes was violated; (2) the name of the Defendant who

violated the right; (3) exactly what that Defendant did or failed to do; (4) how the action or

inaction of that Defendant is connected to the violation of Plaintiff’s constitutional right; and

Case 3:10-cv-08060-MHM--DKD Document 7 Filed 05/20/10 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

27

28

JDDL - 3 -

(5) what specific injury Plaintiff suffered because of that Defendant’s conduct. Rizzo v.

Goode, 423 U.S. 362, 371-72, 377 (1976).

 Plaintiff must repeat this process for each person he names as a Defendant. If Plaintiff

fails to affirmatively link the conduct of each named Defendant with the specific injury

suffered by Plaintiff, the allegation against that Defendant will be dismissed for failure to

state a claim. Conclusory allegations that a Defendant or group of Defendants have violated

a constitutional right are not acceptable, and will be dismissed.

Plaintiff should take note that, to state a First Amendment, free-exercise-of-religion

claim, a plaintiff must allege that a defendant substantially burdened the practice of the

plaintiff’s religion by preventing him from engaging in a sincerely held religious belief and

that the defendant did so without any justification reasonably related to legitimate

penological interest. Shakur v. Schriro, 514 F.3d 878 (9th Cir. 2008). In addition, under the

Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000, a government may not impose

a substantial burden on the religious exercise of a confined person unless the government

establishes that the burden furthers a “compelling governmental interest” and does so by “the

least restrictive means.” 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc-1(a)(1)-(2); and (3).

Plaintiff should also take note that a viable claim of First Amendment retaliation

contains five basic elements: (1) an assertion that a state actor took some adverse action

against an inmate (2) because of (3) that prisoner’s protected conduct, and that such action

(4) chilled the inmate’s exercise of his First Amendment rights (or that the inmate suffered

more than minimal harm) and (5) did not reasonably advance a legitimate correctional goal.

Rhodes v. Robinson, 408 F.3d 559, 567-68 (9th Cir. 2005); see also Hines v. Gomez, 108

F.3d 265, 267 (9th Cir. 1997) (retaliation claims requires an inmate to show (1) that the

prison official acted in retaliation for the exercise of a constitutionally protected right, and

(2) that the action “advanced no legitimate penological interest”). The plaintiff has the

burden of demonstrating that his exercise of his First Amendment rights was a substantial or

motivating factor behind the defendants’ conduct. Mt. Healthy City School Dist. Bd. of

Case 3:10-cv-08060-MHM--DKD Document 7 Filed 05/20/10 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

27

28

JDDL - 4 -

Educ. v. Doyle, 429 U.S. 274, 287 (1977); Soranno’s Gasco, Inc. v. Morgan, 874 F.2d 1310,

1314 (9th Cir. 1989). 

A first amended complaint supersedes the original complaint. Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963

F.2d 1258, 1262 (9th Cir. 1992); Hal Roach Studios v. Richard Feiner & Co., 896 F.2d 1542,

1546 (9th Cir. 1990). After amendment, the Court will treat an original complaint as

nonexistent. Ferdik, 963 F.2d at 1262. Any cause of action that was raised in the original

complaint is waived if it is not raised in a first amended complaint. King v. Atiyeh, 814 F.2d

565, 567 (9th Cir. 1987).

III. “Motion for an Order for Service Packet” 

Plaintiff’s request for a service packet is premature. At this point, the Court has

dismissed the Complaint. If Plaintiff files an amended complaint, the Court will screen the

amended complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. If the Court determines that an answer

is required, the Court will direct the Clerk of Court to send Plaintiff a service packet

containing summonses and request for waiver forms for Plaintiff to complete and return to

the Court.

IV. Warnings

A. Address Changes

Plaintiff must file and serve a notice of a change of address in accordance with Rule

83.3(d) of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff must not include a motion for other

relief with a notice of change of address. Failure to comply may result in dismissal of this

action.

B Copies

Plaintiff must submit an additional copy of every filing for use by the Court. See

LRCiv 5.4. Failure to comply may result in the filing being stricken without further notice

to Plaintiff.

C. Possible Dismissal

If Plaintiff fails to timely comply with every provision of this Order, including these

warnings, the Court may dismiss this action without further notice. See Ferdik, 963 F.2d at

Case 3:10-cv-08060-MHM--DKD Document 7 Filed 05/20/10 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

27

28

JDDL - 5 -

1260-61 (a district court may dismiss an action for failure to comply with any order of the

Court).

IT IS ORDERED: 

(1) The Complaint (Doc. #1) is dismissed for failure to comply with Local Rule

of Civil Procedure 3.4(a). Plaintiff has 30 days from the date this Order is filed to file a first

amended complaint in compliance with this Order. 

(2) If Plaintiff fails to file an amended complaint within 30 days, the Clerk of

Court must, without further notice, enter a judgment of dismissal of this action without

prejudice.

(3) Plaintiff’s “Motion for an Order for Service Packet” (Doc. #5) is denied as

premature.

(4) The Clerk of Court must mail Plaintiff a court-approved form for filing a civil

rights complaint by a prisoner.

DATED this 17th day of May, 2010.

Case 3:10-cv-08060-MHM--DKD Document 7 Filed 05/20/10 Page 5 of 5