Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-00986/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-00986-8/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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

VALENTINE E. UNDERWOOD,

Plaintiff,

v.

M. KNOWLES, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:08-cv-00986-GSA PC

ORDER DISMISSING CERTAIN CLAIMS

AND DEFENDANTS

(Docs. 1, 25, and 16)

Plaintiff Valentine E. Underwood, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights

action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on July 17, 2008. On September 25, 2009, the Court screened

Plaintiff’s complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, and issued an order finding that the complaint

states claims against Defendants Northcutt and Martin for retaliation; and against Defendants

Northcutt, Martin, Caviness, Lantz, Trujillo, Truitt, and Fambrough for excessive force, but does not

state any other claims under federal law. Plaintiff was given the option of either filing an amended

complaint curing the deficiencies in his claims or notifying the Court of his willingness to proceed

only on his cognizable claims. On October 16, 2009, Plaintiff filed a notice stating his willingness

to proceed only on the claims found to be cognizable.

Accordingly, based on Plaintiff’s notice, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. This action for damages shall proceed on Plaintiff’s complaint, filed July 17, 2008,

against Defendants Northcutt and Martin for retaliation, in violation of the First

Amendment; and against Defendants Northcutt, Martin, Caviness, Lantz, Trujillo, 

///

Case 1:08-cv-00986-BAM Document 31 Filed 10/21/09 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 Also spelled Pelayo in the complaint. (Doc. 1, Comp., court record pp. 1, 5.) 1

2

Truitt, and Fambrough for use of excessive force physical force, in violation of the

Eighth Amendment;

2. Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment medical care claims against Defendants Ethridge,

Kurtz, and Akano are dismissed, with prejudice, for failure to state a claim upon

which relief may be granted;

3. Plaintiff’s retaliation claims other than the claims against Defendants Northcutt and

Martin are dismissed, with prejudice, for failure to state a claim upon which relief

may be granted;

4. Plaintiff’s due process claim arising from the processing and/or handling of his

inmates appeals are dismissed, with prejudice, for failure to state a claim upon which

relief may be granted;

5. Plaintiff’s due process claim against Defendant Northcutt arising out of the

confiscation of his mail is dismissed, with prejudice, for failure to state a claim upon

which relief may be granted;

6. Plaintiff’s negligence claim is dismissed, without prejudice, for failure to state a

claim upon which relief may be granted;

7. Plaintiff’s claims arising out of the disciplinary hearing at which he lost time credits

are dismissed, without prejudice, for failure to state a claim upon which relief may

be granted;

8. Plaintiff’s claims for injunctive and declaratory relief are dismissed for failure to

state a claim;

9. Defendants Knowles, Arlitz, Frauenhein, Whitehead, Schroeder, Hart, Caudillo,

Playa, Meza, Urbano, Ethridge, Kurtz, Akano, Grannis, Pfeiffer, Flory, Torres, and 1

///

///

///

Case 1:08-cv-00986-BAM Document 31 Filed 10/21/09 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

Chapman are dismissed from this action based on Plaintiff’s failure to state any

claims against them.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: October 21, 2009 /s/ Gary S. Austin 

6i0kij UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:08-cv-00986-BAM Document 31 Filed 10/21/09 Page 3 of 3