Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-02267/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-02267-1/pdf.json

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

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL L. OVERTON, 

Plaintiff, 

 v.

WELLS FARGO CEO; BANK OF

AMERICA CEO; GLENDALE

FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN;

SAM LATHAM; BOBBIE DAVIS;

ETTA PHARR,

Defendants. /

No. C 15-2267 WHA (PR) 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

INTRODUCTION

This is a pro se civil rights complaint filed by a California prisoner proceeding pro se

under 42 U.S.C. 1983. He claims that defendants owe him money pursuant to the settlement of

a lawsuit over medicine he had taken. For the reasons discussed below, the complaint is

DISMISSED.

DISCUSSION

A. STANDARD OF REVIEW

Federal courts must engage in a preliminary screening of cases in which prisoners seek

redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. 

1915A(a). In its review the court must identify any cognizable claims, and dismiss any claims

which are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seek

monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. Id. at 1915A(b)(1),(2). 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2) requires only "a short and plain statement of the

claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief." "Specific facts are not necessary; the

Case 3:15-cv-02267-WHA Document 5 Filed 06/02/15 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

statement need only '"give the defendant fair notice of what the . . . . claim is and the grounds

upon which it rests."'" Erickson v. Pardus, 127 S. Ct. 2197, 2200 (2007) (citations omitted). 

Although in order to state a claim a complaint “does not need detailed factual allegations, . . . a

plaintiff's obligation to provide the 'grounds of his 'entitle[ment] to relief' requires more than

labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not

do. . . . Factual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative

level." Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 127 S. Ct. 1955, 1964-65 (2007) (citations omitted). A

complaint must proffer "enough facts to state a claim for relief that is plausible on its face." Id.

at 1974. Pro se pleadings must be liberally construed. Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep't, 901

F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1990).

B. LEGAL CLAIMS 

Plaintiff alleges that he contracted diabetes from taking a medication for his

schizophrenia. He claims that defendants, who are employees of three different banks, owe him

money gained from a settlement in a lawsuit over the medication. To state a claim under 42

U.S.C. 1983, a plaintiff must allege two essential elements: (1) that a right secured by the

Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and (2) that the violation was committed

by a person acting under the color of state law. West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988). Plaintiff

satisfies neither element of a Section 1983 claim. Defendants are not state actors insofar as they

are employees of private companies. In addition, there is no alleged or apparent violation of

any federal or constitutional law. Accordingly, plaintiff’s claims are not cognizable under

Section 1983. If plaintiff wishes to sue defendants for breach of contract or other violations of

state law, he may do so in state court. 

CONCLUSION

For the reasons set out above, this action is DISMISSED without prejudice. 

The clerk shall enter judgment and close the file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 1 , 2015. 

WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:15-cv-02267-WHA Document 5 Filed 06/02/15 Page 2 of 2