Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-01299/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-01299-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Gerald Edmund Nichols
Plaintiff
Plumas County Correctional Facility
Defendant

Document Text:

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GERALD EDMUND NICHOLS,

Plaintiff,

v.

PLUMAS COUNTY CORRECTIONAL 

FACILITY,

Defendant.

No. 2:15-cv-1299 MCE CKD P

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Plaintiff is a county jail inmate, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, who seeks relief 

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On July 10, 2015, plaintiff’s original complaint was dismissed for 

failure to state a claim, and plaintiff was granted leave to file an amended complaint. (ECF No. 

7.) Plaintiff’s amended complaint is now before the court for screening. (ECF No. 9.) 

The court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against a 

governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The 

court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner 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).

Having reviewed the amended complaint, the undersigned concludes that it, too, fails to 

state a claim. Plaintiff asserts that he was denied access to courts and attaches a complaint filed 

in the Plumas Superior Court in 2013. However, plaintiff does not plead the elements of an 

Case 2:15-cv-01299-MCE-CKD Document 10 Filed 09/03/15 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

27

28

2

access-to-courts claim or name a proper defendant. See Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343, 349-50, 

353 (1996) (prisoner alleging a violation of his right of access to the courts must demonstrate that 

he has suffered “actual injury,” i.e., “demonstrate that a nonfrivolous legal claim had been 

frustrated or was being impeded.”) Because it appears that another round of amendment would 

be futile, the undersigned will recommend dismissal of this action.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed with 

prejudice for failure to 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 fourteen days 

after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections

with the court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings 

and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified 

time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 

(9th Cir. 1991). 

Dated: September 3, 2015

2 / nich1299.fac_fr

_____________________________________

CAROLYN K. DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:15-cv-01299-MCE-CKD Document 10 Filed 09/03/15 Page 2 of 2