Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_17-cv-00049/USCOURTS-casd-3_17-cv-00049-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983pr Prisoner Civil Rights

---

FILED 1

2 17 APR 19 PH iMiP

3

4

OEPUtV

9Y’ 5

6

7

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

19

11 CARLOS RIOS,

CDCR #E-52249,

Case No.: 3:17-cv-00049-BEN-BGS

12 ORDER: Plaintiff,

13

1) GRANTING MOTION TO

PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS

[ECF NO. 2]

vs. 14

15

DAVID STRAYHORN, Correctional

Officer; JONES, Correctional Officer;

S. RUTLEDGE, Correctional Sergeant;

A. ALLAMBY, Correctional Lieutenant;

CAMPOS, Licensed Vocational Nurse;

ESTRADA, Registered Nurse;

G. STRATTON, Chief Deputy Warden;

Defendants.

16 AND

17

2) DIRECTING U.S. MARSHAL TO

EFFECT SERVICE OF COMPLAINT

AND SUMMONS PURSUANT TO 28

U.S.C. § 1915(D) AND FED. R. CIV. P.

4(C)(3)

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

CARLOS RIOS (“Plaintiff’), currently incarcerated at Richard J. Donovan

Correctional Facility (“RJD”), and proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights complaint

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (ECF No. 1). Plaintiff did not prepay the civil filing fee

required by 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a) when he filed his Complaint; instead, he filed a Motion

25

26

27

28

1

3:17-cv-00049-BEN-BGS

Case 3:17-cv-00049-BEN-BGS Document 6 Filed 04/19/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 8
1 tQ Proceed In Forma Pauperis (“IFP”) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) (ECF No. 2),

followed by an addendum which includes his most recent prison trust account statements

(ECF No. 3).

I. Motion to Proceed IFP

All parties instituting any civil action, suit, or proceeding in a district court ofthe

United States, except an application for writ ofhabeas corpus, must pay a filing fee of

$400.2 See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a). The action may proceed despite a plaintiffs failure to

prepay the entire fee only ifhe is granted leave to proceed IFP pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(a). See Andrews v. Cervantes, 493 F.3d 1047, 1051 (9th Cir. 2007). However,

prisoners who are granted leave to proceed IFP remain obligated to pay the entire fee in

“increments” or “installments,” Bruce v. Samuels, 136 S. Ct. 627, 629 (2016); Williams v.

Paramo, 775 F.3d 1182, 1185 (9th Cir. 2015), and regardless ofwhether their action is

ultimately dismissed, see 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1) & (2); Taylor v. Delatoore, 281 F.3d

844, 847 (9th Cir. 2002).

Section 1915(a)(2) also requires prisoners seeking leave to proceed IFP to submit a

“certified copy ofthe trust fund account statement (or institutional equivalent) for ... the

6-month period immediately preceding the filing ofthe complaint.” 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(a)(2); Andrews v. King, 398 F.3d 1113, 1119 (9th Cir. 2005). From the certified

trust account statement, the Court assesses an initial payment of 20% of(a) the average

2

l

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

i Plaintiff has also filed a copy of a letter he wrote to RJD’s Warden Daniel Paramo on

February 7, 2017, requiring an inquiry into alleged acts of “harassment” and “retaliation”

committed by RJD officials who are not named as Defendants in Plaintiffs Complaint. See

ECF No. 5. Because the Court has no jurisdiction over non-parties, and Plaintiff does not

request any relieffrom the Court, it has directed the Clerk to file Plaintiffs letter (ECF No.

4), but takes no action with regard to it.

22

23

24

25

26 2 In addition to the $350 statutory fee, civil litigants must pay an additional administrative

fee of $50. See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a) (Judicial Conference Schedule ofFees, District Court

Misc. Fee Schedule, § 14 (eff. June 1, 2016)). The additional $50 administrative fee does

not apply to persons granted leave to proceed IFP. Id.

27

28

2

3:17-cv-00049-BEN-BGS

Case 3:17-cv-00049-BEN-BGS Document 6 Filed 04/19/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 8
1 monthly deposits in the account for the past six months, or (b) the average monthly

balance in the account for the past six months, whichever is greater, unless the prisoner

has no assets. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1); 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(4). The institution having

custody ofthe prisoner then collects subsequent payments, assessed at 20% ofthe

preceding month’s income, in any month in which his account exceeds $10, and forwards

those payments to the Court until the entire filing fee is paid. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2);

Bruce, 136 S. Ct. at 629.

In support of his IFP Motion, Plaintiff has submitted CDCR Inmate Statement

Reports dated December 8, 2016, and January 10, 2017, together with a prison certificate

completed by a RJD accounting official attesting to his trust account activity and

balances for the six months preceding the filing of his Complaint. See ECF No. 2 at 5-8;

ECF No. 3 at 5-7; 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2); S.D. Cal. CivLR 3.2; Andrews, 398 F.3d at

1119. These statements show that Plaintiffhad an average monthly balance of $17.89,

and average monthly deposits of $12.50 to his account over the six-month period

immediately preceding the filing of his Complaint, as well as an available balance of

$39.66 at the time offiling. See ECF No. 3 at 7. Based on this financial information, the

Court GRANTS Plaintiffs Motion to Proceed IFP (ECF No. 2), and assesses his initial

partial filing fee to be $3.57 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1).

However, the Court will direct the Secretary ofthe California Department of

Corrections and Rehabilitation (“CDCR”), or his designee, to collect this initial fee only

ifsufficient funds are available in Plaintiffs account at the time this Order is executed.

See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(4) (providing that “[i]n no event shall a prisoner be prohibited

from bringing a civil action or appealing a civil action or criminal judgment for the

reason that the prisoner has no assets and no means by which to pay the initial partial

filing fee”); Bruce, 136 S. Ct. at 630; Taylor, 281 F.3d at 850 (finding that 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(b)(4) acts as a “safety-valve” preventing dismissal of a prisoner’s IFP case based

solely on a “failure to pay .. . due to the lack offunds available to him when payment is

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

3:17-cv-00049-BEN-BGS

Case 3:17-cv-00049-BEN-BGS Document 6 Filed 04/19/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 3 of 8
1 ordered”). The remaining balance ofthe $350 total fee owed in this case must be

collected and forwarded to the Clerk ofthe Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1).

II. Screening Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B) and 1915A(b)

A. Standard ofReview

Because Plaintiffis a prisoner and is proceeding IFP, his Complaint also requires a

pre-answer screening pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) and § 1915A(b). Under these

statutes, the Court must sua sponte dismiss a prisoner’s IFP complaint, or any portion of

it, which is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim, or seeks damages from defendants

who are immune. See Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1126-27 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc)

(discussing 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)); Rhodes v. Robinson, 621 F.3d 1002, 1004 (9th Cir.

2010) (discussing 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)). “The purpose of [screening] is ‘to ensure that

the targets offrivolous or malicious suits need not bear the expense ofresponding.’”

Nordstrom v. Ryan, 762 F.3d 903, 920 n.l (9th Cir. 2014) (quoting Wheeler v. Wexford

Health Sources, Inc., 689 F.3d 680, 681 (7th Cir. 2012)).

“The standard for determining whether a plaintiffhas failed to state a claim upon

which relief can be granted under § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) is the same as the Federal Rule of

Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) standard for failure to state a claim.” Watison v. Carter, 668

F.3d 1108, 1112 (9th Cir. 2012); see also Wilhelm v. Rotman, 680 F.3d 1113, 1121 (9th

Cir. 2012) (noting that screening pursuant to § 1915A “incorporates the familiar standard

applied in the context offailure to state a claim under Federal Rule ofCivil Procedure

12(b)(6)”). Rule 12(b)(6) requires a complaint “contain sufficient factual matter, accepted

as true, to state a claim to reliefthat is plausible on its face.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S.

662, 678 (2009) (internal quotation marks omitted); Wilhelm, 680 F.3d at 1121.

Detailed factual allegations are not required, but “[t]hreadbare recitals ofthe

elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not suffice.”

Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678. “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. The “mere possibility ofmisconduct” or

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

4

3:17-cv-00049-BEN-BGS

Case 3:17-cv-00049-BEN-BGS Document 6 Filed 04/19/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 4 of 8
“unadorned, the defendant-unlawfully-harmed me accusation^]” fall short ofmeeting

this plausibility standard. Id.; see also Moss v. U.S. Secret Serv., 572 F.3d 962, 969 (9th

Cir. 2009).

1

2

3

4 Finally, in deciding whether Plaintiff has stated a plausible claim for relief, the

Court may consider exhibits attached to his Complaint. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(c) (“A

copy of a written instrument that is an exhibit to a pleading is a part ofthe pleading for all

purposes.”); Hal Roach Studios, Inc. v. RichardFeiner & Co., Inc., 896 F.2d 1542, 1555

n.19 (9th Cir. 1990) (citing Amfac Mortg. Corp. v. Ariz. Mall ofTempe, Inc., 583 F.2d

426 (9th Cir. 1978) (“[M]aterial which is properly submitted as part ofthe complaint may

be considered” in ruling on a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss.)).

Plaintiffs Allegations

Plaintiff claims that on January 13, 2015, RJD Correctional Officer Strayhom used

unnecessary and unreasonable force against him “without need or provocation” after

Plaintiff called Strayhom by his first name in RJD’s Facility C Medical Clinic. (ECF No.

1 at 12-13, 17, 19-20.) Plaintiff claims Correctional Officer Jones, Sergeant Rutledge,

and Registered Nurse Estrada observed the battery and “had the opportunity” but did not

intervene {id. at 8, 14, 20), Licensed Vocational Nurse Campos failed to provide him

necessary medical care and/or adequately record his injuries {id. at 17, 20), and Rutledge,

Correctional Lieutenant Allamby, and RJD’s ChiefDeputy Warden G. Stratton, all failed

to take disciplinary action against and/or document Strayhom’s use offorce as part of a

conspiracy to retaliate against him for having filed a previous lawsuit, Rios v. Paramo,

S.D. Cal. Civil Case No. 3:14-cv-01073-WQH-DElB, in which both Allamby and

Rutledge had been named as Defendants. {Id. at 13, 18, 50-66.) Plaintiffseeks a

declaratory judgment, as well as compensatory and punitive damages. {Id. at 22-23.)

Based on these allegations, the Court finds Plaintiffs Complaint sufficient to

survive the “low threshold” for proceeding past the sua sponte screening required by 28

U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2) and 1915A(b). See Wilhelm, 680 F.3d at 1123; Iqbal, 556 U.S. at

678; Hudson v. Me Million, 503 U.S. 1, 6-7 (1992) (explaining that when prison officials

5

6

7

8

9

10

11 B.

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

5

3:17-CV-00049-BEN-BGS

Case 3:17-cv-00049-BEN-BGS Document 6 Filed 04/19/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 5 of 8
1 stand accused of using excessive force in violation ofthe Eighth Amendment, the core

judicial inquiry is “whether force was applied in a good-faith effort to maintain or restore

discipline, or maliciously and sadistically to cause harm”); Robins v. Meecham, 60 F.3d

1436, 1442 (9th Cir.1995) (holding that “a prison official can violate a prisoner’s Eighth

Amendment rights by failing to intervene”); Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 105-06

(1976) (prison officials are liable ifthey act with deliberate indifference to a prisoner’s

serious medical needs); id. at 104 (deliberate indifference “is manifested by prison

[officials] intentionally denying or delaying access to medical care”); Rhodes v.

Robinson, 408 F.3d 559, 567-68 (9th Cir. 2005) (First Amendment retaliation claim

requires prisoner to allege: “(1)... a state actor took some adverse action against [him]

(2) because of(3) that prisoner’s protected conduct, and that such action (4) chilled the

inmate’s exercise of his First Amendment rights, and (5) the action did not reasonably

advance a legitimate correctional goal.”).

Therefore, the Court will direct the U.S. Marshal to effect service ofsummons of

Plaintiffs Complaint on his behalf. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) (“The officers ofthe court

shall issue and serve all process, and perform all duties in [IFP] cases.”); Fed. R. Civ. P.

4(c)(3) (“[T]he court may order that service be made by a United States marshal or

deputy marshal... ifthe plaintiffis authorized to proceed in forma pauperis under 28

U.S.C. § 1915.”).

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20 III

21 III

22 III

23 III

24 III

25 III

26 III

27 III

28 III

6

3:17-cv-00049-BEN-BGS

Case 3:17-cv-00049-BEN-BGS Document 6 Filed 04/19/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 6 of 8
1 III. Conclusion and Order

2 For the reasons explained, the Court:

3 1. GRANTS Plaintiffs Motion to Proceed IFP pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)

4 (ECF No. 2).

5 ORDERS the Secretary ofthe CDCR, or his designee, to collect from

Plaintiffs trust account the $3.57 initial filing fee assessed, ifthose funds are available at

the time this Order is executed, and to forward whatever balance remains ofthe full $350

owed in monthly payments in an amount equal to twenty percent (20%) ofthe preceding

month’s income to the Clerk ofthe Court each time the amount in Plaintiffs account

exceeds $10 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2). ALL PAYMENTS MUST BE

CLEARLY IDENTIFIED BY THE NAME AND NUMBER ASSIGNED TO THIS

ACTION.

2.

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13 DIRECTS the Clerk ofthe Court to serve a copy ofthis Order on Scott

Kernan, Secretary, CDCR, P.O. Box 942883, Sacramento, California, 94283-0001.

DIRECTS the Clerk to issue a summons as to Plaintiffs Complaint (ECF

No. 1) and forward it to Plaintiff along with a blank U.S. Marshal Form 285 for each

Defendant. In addition, the Clerk will provide Plaintiffwith a certified copy ofthis Order,

certified copies ofhis Complaint, and the summons so that he may serve Defendants.

Upon receipt ofthis “IFP Package,” Plaintiffmust complete the USM Form 285s as

completely and accurately as possible, include an address where each named Defendant

may befound and/or subject to service, and return them to the United States Marshal

according to the instructions the Clerk provides in the letter accompanying his IFP

Package.

3.

14

15 4.

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

ORDERS the U.S. Marshal to serve a copy ofthe Complaint and summons

upon the Defendants as directed by Plaintiff on the USM Form 285s provided to him. All

costs ofthat service will be advanced by the United States. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d); Fed.

R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3).

24 5.

25

26

27

28 6. ORDERS Plaintiff, after service has been effected by the U.S. Marshal, to

7

3:17-cv-00049-BEN-BGS

Case 3:17-cv-00049-BEN-BGS Document 6 Filed 04/19/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 7 of 8
serve upon Defendants, or if appearance has been entered by counsel, upon Defendants’

counsel, a copy of every further pleading, motion, or other document submitted for the

Court’s consideration pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(b). Plaintiffmust include with every

original document he seeks to file with the Clerk ofthe Court, a certificate stating the

manner in which a true and correct copy ofthat document has been served on Defendants

or their counsel, and the date ofthat service. See S.D. Cal. CivLR 5.2. Any document

received by the Court which has not been properly filed with the Clerk or which fails to

include a Certificate of Service upon the Defendants, or their counsel, may be

disregarded.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

IQ IT IS SO ORDERED.

11

12 Dated: Apr! 2017

13 Benitez nUnited States District Judge

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

8

3:17-cv-00049-BEN-BGS

Case 3:17-cv-00049-BEN-BGS Document 6 Filed 04/19/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 8 of 8