Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_23-cv-02313/USCOURTS-caed-2_23-cv-02313-4/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Dante Renee Budd
Plaintiff
R. Guillermo
Defendant
J. Harrison
Defendant
S. Martinez
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

DANTE RENEE BUDD,

Plaintiff,

v. 

J. HARRISSON, et al.,

Defendants. 

No. 2:23-cv-2313 KJN P

ORDER

Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding without counsel, in an action brought under 42 

U.S.C. § 1983. On November 15, 2023, the court dismissed plaintiff’s complaint with leave to 

amend. On December 1, 2023, plaintiff filed an amended complaint. 

The court reviewed plaintiff’s amended complaint and, for the limited purposes of 

§ 1915A screening, finds that it states potentially cognizable claim against defendants J. Harrison,

S. Martinez, and R. Guillermo. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.

For the reasons stated below, the court finds that the amended complaint does not state 

cognizable claims under the Fourth or Fourteenth Amendments. 

Plaintiff alleges that the actions and omissions of defendants also violated plaintiff’s rights 

under the Fourth Amendment. (ECF No. 15 at 11.) However, plaintiff includes no facts 

demonstrating a violation of the Fourth Amendment. Plaintiff’s allegations concerning the failure 

////

Case 2:23-cv-02313-KJM-CSK Document 16 Filed 12/12/23 Page 1 of 6
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

of defendants to provide emergency medical care or failing to protect plaintiff arise under the 

Eighth Amendment, not the Fourth Amendment.

In addition to alleging cruel and unusual punishment, plaintiff alleges defendants’ actions

and omissions violated plaintiff’s Fourteenth Amendment rights. However, such claim is 

subsumed by the Eighth Amendment and does not state a separate claim. See Albright v. Oliver, 

510 U.S. 266, 273 (1994) (“Where a particular Amendment provides an explicit textual source of 

constitutional protection against a particular sort of government behavior, that Amendment, not 

the more generalized notion of “substantive due process,” must be the guide for analyzing such a 

claim.”) (internal quotes and citation omitted); Whitley v. Albers, 475 U.S. 312, 327(1986) (the 

Fourteenth Amendment affords a prisoner no greater protection than the Eighth Amendment).

Finally, plaintiff fails to allege facts supporting a discrimination claim under the 

Fourteenth Amendment. “The Equal Protection Clause . . . is essentially a direction that all 

persons similarly situated should be treated alike.” City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Ctr., Inc., 

473 U.S. 432 (1985) (citing Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202, 216 (1982)). “To state a § 1983 claim 

for violation of the Equal Protection Clause ‘a plaintiff must show that the defendants acted with 

an intent or purpose to discriminate against the plaintiff based upon membership in a protected 

class.’” Thornton v. City of St. Helens, 425 F.3d 1158, 1166 (9th Cir. 2005) (quoting Lee v. City 

of Los Angeles, 250 F.3d 668, 686 (9th Cir. 2001)), or show that similarly situated individuals 

were intentionally treated differently without a rational relationship to a legitimate state purpose, 

Engquist v. Oregon Department of Agr., 553 U.S. 591, 601-02 (2008). “Intentional 

discrimination means that a defendant acted at least in part because of a plaintiff’s protected 

status.” Serrano v. Francis, 345 F.3d 1071, 1082 (9th Cir. 2003) (quoting Maynard v. City of San 

Jose, 37 F.3d 1396, 1404 (9th Cir. 1994)) (emphasis in original). 

Here, the sole allegation supporting plaintiff’s discrimination claim is that on November 

10, 2023, a Caucasian or Hispanic inmate was allowed to go man-down on CHCF E yard near the 

medical center. However, plaintiff fails to show he is a member of a protected class, and also 

fails to show any defendant refused him medical care because of such protected class status. 

Plaintiff’s allegations fail to demonstrate that plaintiff and the other inmate were similarly 

Case 2:23-cv-02313-KJM-CSK Document 16 Filed 12/12/23 Page 2 of 6
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

3

situated; indeed, it is likely the other inmate suffered from a different medical condition than 

plaintiff. Moreover, it is unclear whether the other inmate’s medical condition constituted a 

legitimate state purpose for treating such inmate differently. Thus, plaintiff fails to state an equal 

protection claim under the Fourteenth Amendment. Based on the facts alleged in the amended 

complaint, it is unclear plaintiff can amend to state a cognizable equal protection claim. But in an 

abundance of caution, plaintiff is granted leave to amend. 

Plaintiff’s Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment claims are dismissed with leave to amend.1 

Plaintiff may proceed forthwith to serve defendants J. Harrison, S. Martinez, and R. 

Guillermo and pursue such claims against defendants, or he may delay serving any defendant and 

attempt again to address the above deficiencies. 

If plaintiff elects to file a second amended complaint, he has thirty days so to do. But he 

is not obligated to amend.

If plaintiff elects to proceed forthwith against defendants J. Harrison, S. Martinez, and R. 

Guillermo, against whom he stated potentially cognizable Eighth Amendment claims for relief, 

then within thirty days he must so elect on the appended form. In this event the court will 

construe plaintiff’s election as consent to dismissal of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment 

claims against defendants without prejudice and will order service of process on defendants. 

Plaintiff is advised that any second amended complaint must clearly identify each 

defendant and the action that defendant took that violated constitutional rights. The court is not 

required to review exhibits to determine what plaintiff’s charging allegations are as to each 

named defendant. The charging allegations must be set forth in the second amended complaint so 

defendants have fair notice of the claims plaintiff is presenting.

Any second amended complaint must show the federal court has jurisdiction, the action is 

brought in the right place, and plaintiff is entitled to relief if plaintiff’s allegations are true. It 

1

 Further, it appears that plaintiff did not exhaust his administrative remedies as to his putative 

discrimination claim prior to filing the instant action. A prisoner may bring no § 1983 action 

until he has exhausted such administrative remedies as are available to him. 42 U.S.C. 

§ 1997e(a). The requirement is mandatory. Booth v. Churner, 532 U.S. 731, 741 (2001). The 

602 form appended to plaintiff’s amended complaint is dated November 10, 2023, after the 

instant action was filed on October 12, 2023.

Case 2:23-cv-02313-KJM-CSK Document 16 Filed 12/12/23 Page 3 of 6
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

4

must contain a request for particular relief. Plaintiff must identify as a defendant only persons 

who personally participated in a substantial way in depriving plaintiff of a federal constitutional 

right. Johnson v. Duffy, 588 F.2d 740, 743 (9th Cir. 1978) (a person subjects another to the 

deprivation of a constitutional right if he does an act, participates in another’s act or omits to 

perform an act he is legally required to do that causes the alleged deprivation). 

A district court must construe a pro se pleading “liberally” to determine if it states a claim 

and, prior to dismissal, tell a plaintiff of deficiencies in the complaint and give plaintiff an 

opportunity to cure them. See Lopez, 203 F.3d at 1130-31. While detailed factual allegations are 

not required, “[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere 

conclusory statements, do not suffice.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (citing Bell 

Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)). Plaintiff must set forth “sufficient factual 

matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’” Ashcroft, 556 

U.S. at 678 (quoting Bell Atlantic Corp., 550 U.S. at 570).

A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual 

content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the 

defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged. The plausibility 

standard is not akin to a “probability requirement,” but it asks for 

more than a sheer possibility that a defendant has acted unlawfully. 

Where a complaint pleads facts that are merely consistent with a 

defendant’s liability, it stops short of the line between possibility and 

plausibility of entitlement to relief.

Ashcroft, 556 U.S. at 678 (citations and quotation marks omitted). Although legal conclusions 

can provide the framework of a complaint, they must be supported by factual allegations, and are 

not entitled to the assumption of truth. Id. at 1950. 

Any second amended complaint must be complete in itself without reference to any prior 

pleading. Local Rule 220; See Ramirez v. County of San Bernardino, 806 F.3d 1002, 1008 (9th 

Cir. 2015) (“an ‘amended complaint supersedes the original, the latter being treated thereafter as 

non-existent.’” (internal citation omitted)). Once plaintiff files a second amended complaint, the 

original pleading is superseded.

////

////

Case 2:23-cv-02313-KJM-CSK Document 16 Filed 12/12/23 Page 4 of 6
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

5

Finally, plaintiff is not granted leave to add new claims or new defendants to this action. 

Rather, plaintiff is granted leave to amend solely as to claims arising from the May 7, 2023 

incident. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment claims are dismissed with leave to 

amend. Within thirty days of service of this order, plaintiff may file a second amended complaint 

to attempt to rectify the above deficiencies. Plaintiff is not obliged to amend his complaint.

2. The allegations in the pleading are sufficient at least to state potentially cognizable 

claims against defendants J. Harrison, S. Martinez, and R. Guillermo. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. If 

plaintiff chooses to proceed solely as to such Eighth Amendment claims, plaintiff shall so indicate 

on the attached form and return it to the court within thirty days from the date of this order. In 

this event, the court will construe plaintiff’s election to proceed forthwith as consent to an order 

dismissing the defective Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment claims without prejudice and will 

order service of the amended complaint on defendants. 

3. Failure to comply with this order will result in a recommendation that the Fourth and 

Fourteenth Amendment claims be dismissed without prejudice, and this action will proceed solely 

on plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment claims against defendants J. Harrison, S. Martinez, and R. 

Guillermo.

Dated: December 12, 2023

/budd2313.14o

Case 2:23-cv-02313-KJM-CSK Document 16 Filed 12/12/23 Page 5 of 6
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

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DANTE RENEE BUDD, 

Plaintiff,

v. 

J. HARRISSON, et al.,

Defendants. 

No. 2:23-cv-2313 KJN P

NOTICE OF ELECTION

Plaintiff elects to proceed as follows: 

______ Plaintiff opts to proceed with his Eighth Amendment claims against 

defendants J. Harrison, S. Martinez, and R. Guillermo, and consents to 

dismissal of his Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment claims against 

defendants J. Harrison, S. Martinez, and R. Guillermo without prejudice. 

OR

_____ Plaintiff opts to file a second amended complaint and delay service of 

process.

DATED: 

_______________________________ 

Plaintiff

Case 2:23-cv-02313-KJM-CSK Document 16 Filed 12/12/23 Page 6 of 6