Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_19-cv-02684/USCOURTS-cand-3_19-cv-02684-0/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 

United States District Court 

Northern District of California 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

VICTOR CADENA, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

SCOTT CUPP, et al., 

Defendants. 

Case No. 19-cv-02684-RS (PR) 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

This 42 U.S.C. § 1983 suit is DISMISSED because plaintiff has not complied with 

federal pleading rules or with the Court’s repeated instructions to follow those rules. 

Federal pleading rules require that claims be based on “the same transaction, occurrence, 

or series of transactions or occurrences” and pose a “question of law or fact common to all 

defendants.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 20(a)(2). They also require that a complaint “contain 

sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its 

face.’” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atlantic Corp. v. 

Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). 

Plaintiff’s current complaint contains many unrelated and conclusory claims of 

retaliation, harassment, improper cell searches, placement in cells without pillows or 

bedding, etc. One defendant he names, Cupp, was not involved in the other defendant’s 

actions. Also, most of the lack of bedding claims are not linked to any specific defendant. 

Case 3:19-cv-02684-RS Document 12 Filed 02/06/20 Page 1 of 2
ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

CASE NO. 19-cv-02684-RS

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 

27 

28 

United States District Court 

Northern District of California 

He speaks of two cell searches, but the second is not tied to any defendant. These 

allegations of a single cell search — the second not having been linked to any defendant —

do not state a claim for relief. Plaintiff has not alleged any specific facts indicating it was 

an unjustified search. Federal pleading rules require factual allegations that indicate 

“more than a sheer possibility that a defendant has acted unlawfully.” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 

678. Plaintiff also mentions a wrong committed against another inmate that did not affect 

or damage plaintiff at all. Furthermore, in none of these claims does plaintiff identify 

which constitutional rights were violated. 

The Court has provided plaintiff with two prior warnings that his complaints are 

deficient, and has given plaintiff two opportunities to cure these deficiencies. (Dkt. Nos. 7 

and 10.) If plaintiff believes he can comply with federal pleading rules to narrow his 

claims and provide sufficient factual detail to state a claim for relief, he may file an 

amended complaint. 

This suit is DISMISSED without prejudice. The Clerk shall enter judgment in favor 

of defendants, and close the file. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: February ___, 2020

_________________________ 

 RICHARD SEEBORG 

 United States District Judge 

6

Case 3:19-cv-02684-RS Document 12 Filed 02/06/20 Page 2 of 2