Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-02520/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-02520-13/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ERIC CHARLES RODNEY K’NAPP

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-05-2520 FCD CMK P

vs.

R.Q. HICKMAN, et al., ORDER

Defendants.

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with an action

filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. By order filed November 16, 2006, the court vacated its

September 28, 2006 screening order, dismissed plaintiff’s September 5, 2006 complaint, and

granted him leave to file an amended complaint. Plaintiff has now filed an amended complaint. 

Plaintiff names several defendants in his third amended complaint. The gist of his

complaint is that defendants at Mule Creek State Prison (MCSP) have retaliated against him for

complaining about staff misconduct and working to improve prison conditions. Plaintiff alleges

that defendants interfered with his prison grievances, interfered with his right to visitation,

confiscated materials from a bulletin board, forced him to resign from the Men’s Advisory

Council, and forced other prisoners to deface a mural that plaintiff had painted. Finally, plaintiff 

alleges that his constitutional rights were violated by deplorable living conditions which he

Case 2:05-cv-02520-KJM-CMK Document 41 Filed 12/13/06 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

2

suffered during three separate placements in administrative segregation and by being served

contaminated food. 

Plaintiff’s claims concerning the conditions he alleged encountered in

Administrative Segregation and his claims that he was served contaminated food state 

cognizable claims for relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). By

themselves, the claims that defendants interfered with his prison grievances, interfered with his

right to visitation, confiscated materials from a bulletin board, forced him to resign from the

Men’s Advisory Council, and forced other prisoners to deface a mural that plaintiff had painted

do not state cognizable civil rights claims. However, to the extent that plaintiff alleges that the

defendants engaged in the above described actions as part of ongoing retaliatory conduct

stemming from plaintiff’s filing of a grievance (a constitutionally protected activity) concerning

an incident in 2000, plaintiff does state a cognizable retaliation claim against defendants. 

The court finds that the December 1, 2006 amended complaint states a cognizable

claim for relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). If the allegations of the

amended complaint are proven, plaintiff has a reasonable opportunity to prevail on the merits of

this action. The court, therefore, finds that service is appropriate and will direct service by the

U.S. Marshal without pre-payment of costs. Plaintiff is informed, however, that this action

cannot proceed further until plaintiff complies with this order. Plaintiff is warned that failure to

comply with this order may result in dismissal of the action. See Local Rule 11-110. 

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Service is appropriate for the following defendants: R.Q. Hickman, Ali, C.

Boyd, D. Brown, M. Brown, Broyles, Campbell, Carrillo, Cherry, Clevenstine, Danziger,

Doherty, Emigh, Etheredge, Fowler, Gentile, Grannis, Gray, Gunning, Gutierrez, Hansen, Hein,

Henderson, Hensley, Hogan, Hurdle, Kaiser, Kanipe, Keeland, Kernan, King, Klinefelter, Knipp,

Knowles, Kudlata, Laguna, Lattimore, Leeworth, Lincoln, Marshall, McNeil, Melching, Mesa,

Murray, Mynhier, Nelson, O’Connor, Olsen, Poe, Presley, Reaves, Rendon, Reyes, Rianda,

Case 2:05-cv-02520-KJM-CMK Document 41 Filed 12/13/06 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

3

Robinson, Sauceda, Seinwerth, Silva, Smith, Stanley, Stewart, Subia, Taylor, Uribe,

Vasconcellos, Vasquez, Warren, Warvarovski, White, and Whittle.

2. The Clerk of the Court shall send plaintiff seventy-one USM-285 forms, one

summons, an instruction sheet and a copy of the amended complaint filed December 1, 2006.

3. Within thirty days from the date of this order, plaintiff shall complete the

attached Notice of Submission of Documents and submit the following documents to the court:

a. The completed Notice of Submission of Documents;

b. One completed summons;

c. One completed USM-285 form for each defendant listed in number 1

above; and 

d. Seventy-two copies of the endorsed amended complaint filed December

1, 2006. 

4. Plaintiff need not attempt service on defendants and need not request waiver of

service. Upon receipt of the above-described documents, the court will direct the United States

Marshal to serve the above-named defendants pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4

without payment of costs. 

DATED: December 12, 2006.

______________________________________

CRAIG M. KELLISON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:05-cv-02520-KJM-CMK Document 41 Filed 12/13/06 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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Plaintiff, No. CIV 

vs.

 NOTICE OF SUBMISSION

Defendants. OF DOCUMENTS

 /

Plaintiff hereby submits the following documents in compliance with the court's

order filed :

 completed summons form

 completed USM-285 forms

 copies of the 

 Amended Complaint

DATED: 

 

Plaintiff

Case 2:05-cv-02520-KJM-CMK Document 41 Filed 12/13/06 Page 4 of 4