Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01004/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01004-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Federal Question: Bivens 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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CASHMERE CAZEAU, CASE NO. CV-F-05-1004 REC DLB P

Plaintiff, ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT

WITH LEAVE TO AMEND

vs.

CHAVEZ, et al.,

Defendants. [Doc. 1]

 /

Plaintiff is a prisoner in federal custody at the United States Penitentiary at Atwater and is

proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis. Plaintiff seeks relief pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown

Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), which provides a remedy for

violation of civil rights by federal actors. Plaintiff filed the instant action on August 4, 2005. 

A. Screening Standard

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

governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The court

must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are legally “frivolous

or malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek monetary relief

from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1),(2). “Notwithstanding any

filing fee, or any portion thereof, that may have been paid, the court shall dismiss the case at any time

Case 1:05-cv-01004-AWI-DLB Document 8 Filed 05/03/06 Page 1 of 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

2

if the court determines that . . . the action or appeal . . . fails to state a claim upon which relief may be

granted.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). 

A complaint, or portion thereof, should only be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which

relief may be granted if it appears beyond doubt that plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of the

claim or claims that would entitle him to relief. See Hishon v. King & Spalding, 467 U.S. 69, 73 (1984),

citing Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46 (1957); see also Palmer v. Roosevelt Lake Log Owners

Ass'n, 651 F.2d 1289, 1294 (9th Cir. 1981). In reviewing a complaint under this standard, the court must

accept as true the allegations of the complaint in question, Hospital Bldg. Co. v. Rex Hospital Trustees,

425 U.S. 738, 740 (1976), construe the pleading in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, and resolve

all doubts in the plaintiff's favor. Jenkins v. McKeithen, 395 U.S. 411, 421 (1969).

B. Summary of Plaintiff’s Complaint

Plaintiff names Mr. Chavez, the Educational Supervisor as the only defendant in this action.

Plaintiff claims that on July 7, 2005, he filed an administrative grievance regarding the failure of

administrative staff to provide continuing educational programs in accordance with federal regulations.

Plaintiff alleges that defendant Chavez informed him that filing a grievance would be useless. Plaintiff

contends Chavez’ actions in interfering with the administrative grievance process were arbitrary,

malicious and in disregard for plaintiff’s administrative and constitutional rights.

C. Discussion

There is no constitutional right to an inmate appeals process. The Ninth Circuit has held that

Prisoners do not have a "separate constitutional entitlement to a specific prison grievance procedure."

Ramirez v. Galaza, 334 F.3d 850, 860 (9th Cir.2003), citing Mann v. Adams, 855 F.2d 639, 640 (9th

Cir.1988). The non-existence of, or the failure of prison officials to properly implement, an

administrative appeals process within the prison system does not raise constitutional concerns. Mann

v. Adams, 855 F.2d 639, 640 (9th Cir.1988). See also, Buckley v. Barlow, 997 F.2d 494, 495 (8th

Cir.1993); Flick v. Alba, 932 F.2d 728 (8th Cir.1991); Azeez v. DeRobertis, 568 F.Supp. 8, 10

(N.D.Ill.1982) ("[A prison] grievance procedure is a procedural right only, it does not confer any

substantive right upon the inmates. Hence, it does not give rise to a protected liberty interest requiring

the procedural protections envisioned by the fourteenth amendment"). A failure to process a grievance

Case 1:05-cv-01004-AWI-DLB Document 8 Filed 05/03/06 Page 2 of 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

3

does not state a constitutional violation. Buckley, supra. 

D. Conclusion

After reviewing plaintiff’s complaint, the court finds that the complaint does not contain any

claims for relief that are cognizable under Bivens. The court will provide plaintiff with the opportunity

to amend his complaint. 

Plaintiff is also advised that he must specifically link the named defendants to the actions or

omissions that plaintiff believes violated his constitutional rights. 

Finally, plaintiff is advised that Local Rule 15-220 requires that an amended complaint be

complete in itself without reference to any prior pleading. As a general rule, an amended complaint

supersedes the original complaint. See Loux v. Rhay, 375 F.2d 55, 57 (9th Cir. 1967). Once plaintiff

files an amended complaint, the original pleading no longer serves any function in the case. Therefore,

in an amended complaint, as in an original complaint, each claim and the involvement of each defendant

must be sufficiently alleged.

Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s complaint is dismissed, with leave to amend, for failure to state a claim upon

which relief may be granted;

2. Within thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order, plaintiff shall file an

amended complaint bearing the caption “Amended Complaint;”

3. The Clerk’s Office shall send plaintiff a Bivens complaint form;

4. If plaintiff fails to file an amended complaint, the court will recommend that this action

be dismissed, with prejudice, for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be

granted. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: May 2, 2006 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

3b142a UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-01004-AWI-DLB Document 8 Filed 05/03/06 Page 3 of 3