Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_10-cv-00226/USCOURTS-azd-2_10-cv-00226-2/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

1

 “Doc.#” refers to the docket number of filings in this case.

JDDL-K

WO SC

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Karl L. Guillen, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Quincy Owens, et al., 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 10-0226-PHX-MHM (LOA)

ORDER

Plaintiff Karl L. Guillen, who is confined in the Arizona State Prison ComplexEyman, Special Management Unit I (SMU I), in Florence, Arizona, has filed a pro se civil

rights Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and paid the filing fee. (Doc.# 9, 11.)1

Plaintiff has also filed a notice of payment and motion for status. (Doc.# 12.) The Court will

grant the motion for status to the extent stated herein and dismiss the Complaint with leave

to amend. 

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

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

28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1), (2). 

Case 2:10-cv-00226-JWS Document 14 Filed 07/02/10 Page 1 of 7
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-K - 2 -

A pleading must contain a “short and plain statement of the claim showing that the

pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2) (emphasis added). While Rule 8 does not

demand detailed factual allegations, “it demands more than an unadorned, the-defendantunlawfully-harmed-me accusation.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009).

“Threadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory

statements, do not suffice.” Id.

“[A] complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a

claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’” Id. (quoting Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly,

550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). A claim is plausible “when the plaintiff pleads factual content

that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the

misconduct alleged.” Id. “Determining whether a complaint states a plausible claim for

relief [is] . . . a context-specific task that requires the reviewing court to draw on its judicial

experience and common sense.” Id. at 1950. Thus, although a plaintiff’s specific factual

allegations may be consistent with a constitutional claim, a court must assess whether there

are other “more likely explanations” for a defendant’s conduct. Id. at 1951.

If the Court determines that a pleading could be cured by the allegation of other facts,

a pro se litigant is entitled to an opportunity to amend a complaint before dismissal of the

action. See Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1127-29 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc). The Court

should not, however, advise the litigant how to cure the defects. This type of advice “would

undermine district judges’ role as impartial decisionmakers.” Pliler v. Ford, 542 U.S. 225,

231 (2004); see also Lopez, 203 F.3d at 1131 n.13 (declining to decide whether the court was

required to inform a litigant of deficiencies). Plaintiff’s Complaint will be dismissed for

failure to comply with the Instructions for completing the court-approved form with leave

to amend.

II. Complaint

Plaintiff alleges ten counts. Plaintiff alleges violation of the Americans with

Case 2:10-cv-00226-JWS Document 14 Filed 07/02/10 Page 2 of 7
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

 The ADA is applicable in the prison context. Pennsylvania Dep’t of Corr. v.

Yeskey, 524 U.S. 206, 213 (1998). Under Title II of the ADA, “no qualified individual with

a disability shall, by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied

the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of a public entity, or be subjected to

discrimination by any such entity.” 42 U.S.C. § 12132. A “public entity” is “any State or

local government; [or] (B) any department, agency, special purpose district, or other

instrumentality of a State or States or local government....” 42 U.S.C. § 12131. Individuals,

however, may only be sued under the ADA in their official, rather than, their individual

capacities. Vinson v. Thomas, 288 F.3d 1145, 1156 (9th Cir. 2002) (plaintiff cannot sue state

officials in their individual capacities to vindicate rights created by Title II of the ADA). To

state an ADA claim, a plaintiff must allege facts to support that he: “(1) is a handicapped

person; (2) that he is otherwise qualified; and that [prison officials’] actions either (3)

excluded his participation in or denied him the benefits of a service, program, or activity; or

(4) otherwise subjected him to discrimination on the basis of his physical handicap.” Duffy

v. Riveland, 98 F.3d 447, 455 (9th Cir. 1996). 

3

 To state a claim under § 1981, a plaintiff must allege facts to support that (1) he is

a member of a racial minority; (2) defendant intends to discriminate against him on the basis

of race; and (3) the alleged discrimination concerned one or more of the activities

enumerated in the statute. Mian v. Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette, 7 F.3d 1085, 1087 (2d Cir.

1993); accord, Morris v. Office Max, Inc., 89 F.3d 411, 433 (7th Cir. 1996); Green v. State

Bar of Texas, 27 F.3d 1083, 1086 (5th Cir. 1994). Thus, to state a claim under § 1981, a

plaintiff must allege facts to support that he suffered discrimination based upon his race. See

Griffin v. Breckenridge, 403 U.S. 88, 102 (1971); Parks Sch. of Bus., Inc. v. Symington, 51

F.3d 1480, 1487 (9th Cir. 1995). Plaintiff does not allege that he is a member of a racial

minority.

4

 Plaintiff sues Terry Stewart for acts while Stewart was Director of the ADC.

Stewart left the ADC in November, 2002. For any claim against Stewart to be timely, the

claim must have accrued no earlier than January 29, 2008, two years before Plaintiff’s

Complaint was lodged. “[A] claim generally accrues when a plaintiff knows or has reason

to know of the injury which is the basis of his action.” Cabrera v. City of Huntington Park,

159 F.3d 374, 379 (9th Cir. 1998). Therefore, it appears likely that any claim against Stewart

would be time-barred. 

JDDL-K - 3 -

Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12131-34.2 Plaintiff also alleges a violation of his due

process rights, right of access to the courts, unconstitutional conditions of confinement, and

retaliation. He also alleges conspiracy in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981.3

 Plaintiff sues the

following current or former employees of the Arizona Department of Corrections (ADC),

who are or were employed at ADC’s Central Office: Director Charles Ryan; former

Directors, Terry Stewart4

 and Dora Schriro; Corrections Officer (CO) IV Baca; Offender

Case 2:10-cv-00226-JWS Document 14 Filed 07/02/10 Page 3 of 7
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-K - 4 -

Services Administrator Stacey Crabtree; and Appeals Unit Administrator Hauser. Plaintiff

also sues the following ADC employees who were employed at the Lewis Complex: Warden

Berry Larson and Captains John Yielding and Richard Fisher. Plaintiff sues the following

ADC employees who were employed in the Rast Unit of the Lewis Complex: Deputy

Warden Quincy Owens; Captain Wilson; Lieutenants Paula Berger and Michelle O’Brien;

Sergeants Putnam and Smith; CO IV Roberts; CO IIIs Mendoza and Shannon Aragon; and

CO IIs Hatfield and Cristina Renault. Plaintiff sues Warden W. White, Assistant Deputy

Warden D. Tuersbuns, and Sergeant Sturm (Eyman Complex Mail & Property), who were

or are employed at the Eyman Complex. Finally, Plaintiff sues the following ADC

employees who worked in SMU I of the Eyman Complex at relevant times: Deputy Warden

Deleena Carrillo and CO III Cioni. Plaintiff seeks declaratory, injunctive, compensatory, and

punitive relief. 

III. Failure to Comply with Instructions and Rules

A complaint having the factual elements of a cause of action scattered throughout the

complaint and not organized into a “short and plain statement of the claim” may be dismissed

for failure to satisfy Rule 8(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See Sparling v.

Hoffman Constr. Co., 864 F.2d 635, 640 (9th Cir. 1988); see also McHenry v. Renne, 84

F.3d 1172 (9th Cir. 1996). Moreover, under Rule 10(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure, “[i]f doing so would promote clarity, each claim founded on a separate transaction

or occurrence . . . must be stated in a separate count.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(b). Local Rule

3.4(a) requires prisoners to use court-approved form complaints. 

The Instructions state in relevant part that:

Local Rule of Civil Procedure (LRCiv) 3.4(a) provides that complaints by

incarcerated persons must be filed on the court-approved form. The form

must be typed or neatly handwritten. The form must be completely filled in

to the extent applicable. All questions must be answered clearly and concisely

in the appropriate space on the form. If needed, you may attach additional

pages, but no more than fifteen additional pages, of standard letter-sized

paper. You must identify which part of the complaint is being continued and

number all pages. If you do not fill out the form properly, you will be asked

to submit additional or corrected information, which may delay the processing

of your action. You do not need to cite law. 

Case 2:10-cv-00226-JWS Document 14 Filed 07/02/10 Page 4 of 7
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-K - 5 -

(Instructions at ¶ 1) (italics added). The Instructions further provide that: 

1. Counts. You must identify which civil right was violated. You may allege

the violation of only one civil right per count. 2. Issue Involved. Check the box that most closely identifies the issue

involved in your claim. You may check only one box per count. If you

check the box marked “Other,” you must identify the specific issue involved.

3. Supporting Facts. After you have identified which civil right was violated,

you must state the supporting facts. Be as specific as possible. You must state

what each individual defendant did to violate your rights. If there is more than

one defendant, you must identify which defendant did what act. You also

should state the date(s) on which the act(s) occurred, if possible.

4. Injury. State precisely how you were injured by the alleged violation of

your rights.

(Instructions, part C) (italics added). 

While Plaintiff used the court-approved form complaint, he did not comply with the

Instructions for completing it. Generally, Plaintiff fails to concisely allege specific facts to

support how each particular Defendant violated the particular civil right at issue in a given

count. Plaintiff exceeded the page limit, scatters facts throughout the Complaint, and/or

includes allegations that are irrelevant to the violation asserted in a particular count. Plaintiff

also incorporates paragraphs from one or more counts as the factual basis for a different

count rather than concisely alleging facts in support of each count. That is, for each count,

Plaintiff should identify the particular civil right violated, when, how, and by whom.

Because Plaintiff has failed to do so in his Complaint, which is rambling, disjointed, and

difficult to follow, the Complaint will be dismissed with leave to amend. 

IV. Leave to Amend

For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff’s Complaint will be dismissed for failure to

comply with the Instructions. 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

Case 2:10-cv-00226-JWS Document 14 Filed 07/02/10 Page 5 of 7
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-K - 6 -

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. Plaintiff must also

comply with the Instructions provided with the form. If Plaintiff fails to comply with the

Instructions provided with the form, the Court may strike the amended complaint and dismiss

this action without further notice to Plaintiff. 

In each count, Plaintiff must identify the federal constitutional civil right allegedly

violated and the issue most closely involved in that count. Plaintiff must also allege which

defendant(s) violated the right at issue in the count and specifically how. Plaintiff must

repeat this process for each civil right that was violated. Plaintiff may allege only one claim

per count.

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).

V. Warnings

A. Release

Plaintiff must pay the unpaid balance of the filing fee within 120 days of his release.

Also, within 30 days of his release, he must either (1) notify the Court that he intends to pay

the balance or (2) show good cause, in writing, why he cannot. Failure to comply may result

in dismissal of this action.

B. 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.

///

Case 2:10-cv-00226-JWS Document 14 Filed 07/02/10 Page 6 of 7
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-K - 7 -

C. 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.

D. 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

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 is dismissed for failure to comply with the Instructions for

completing the court-approved form complaint. (Doc.# 9.) 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 with

prejudice. 

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

rights complaint by a prisoner.

(4) Plaintiff’s motion for status update is granted to the extent set forth herein.

(Doc.# 12.) 

DATED this 1st day of July, 2010.

Case 2:10-cv-00226-JWS Document 14 Filed 07/02/10 Page 7 of 7