Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01391/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01391-3/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

DAVID W. WILSON,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-06-1391 FCD EFB P

vs.

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT

OF CORRECTIONS AND 

REHABILITATION, et al.,

Defendants. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Plaintiff is a prisoner without counsel prosecuting this civil rights action in forma

pauperis. See 42 U.S.C. § 1983; 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). The case was referred to the undersigned

by Local Rule 72-302 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 

The court dismissed plaintiff’s complaint and directed him to file an amended complaint

limited to his retaliation claims against the named defendants. Order filed March 7, 2007. On

December 26, 2007, plaintiff filed a third amended complaint which, together with exhibits,

totals 74 pages and is nonresponsive to the court’s earlier order in that it is not limited to

plaintiff’s retaliation claims. Plaintiff’s complaint fails to state a claim for relief. To state a

claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, plaintiff must allege an identified defendant deprived plaintiff of a

right secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States while acting under color of

Case 2:06-cv-01391-FCD-EFB Document 17 Filed 04/10/08 Page 1 of 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

2

state law. West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48-49 (1988).

Accordingly, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed for failure to

state a claim. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A; see also Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1128 (9th Cir.

2000) (indigent prisoner proceeding without counsel must be given leave to file amended

complaint unless the court can rule out any possibility that the plaintiff could state a claim).

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty days

after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written

objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned

“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections

within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v.

Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

Dated: April 9, 2008.

Case 2:06-cv-01391-FCD-EFB Document 17 Filed 04/10/08 Page 2 of 2