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 Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BENJAMIN CARANCHINI,

Plaintiff,

 v

DIRECTOR, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT

OF CORRECTIONS AND

REHABILITATION, et al,

Defendant(s).

 /

No C-09-0140 VRW (PR)

ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH LEAVE

TO AMEND

I

At the direction of the court, plaintiff, a prisoner

currently incarcerated at Corcoran State Prison, filed a first

amended complaint under 42 USC § 1983 alleging that officials at

Pelican Bay State Prison (“PBSP”) were deliberately indifferent to

his serious medical needs while he was incarcerated at that

facility. Doc #6; Doc #9. The court directed plaintiff to file an

amended complaint because the original complaint, totaling close to

350 pages, included several lists identifying defendants by name,

but failed to show how the defendants proximately caused the

Case 3:09-cv-00140-JW Document 19 Filed 03/23/10 Page 1 of 4
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

deprivation of his federally-protected rights. See Doc #1 at 9, 12,

14, 16 & 18. Plaintiff’s amended complaint alleges three causes of

action against twenty-five defendants. Doc #9. The amended

complaint, along with the attachments, total over 400 pages. Id. 

II

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 USC § 1915A(a). 

The court must identify cognizable claims or dismiss the complaint,

or any portion of the complaint, if the complaint “is frivolous,

malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be

granted,” or “seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune

from such relief.” Id § 1915A(b). Pleadings filed by pro se

litigants, however, must be liberally construed. Balistreri v

Pacifica Police Dep’t, 901 F2d 696, 699 (9th Cir 1990).

To state a claim under 42 USC § 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 alleged violation was committed by a person acting under the

color of state law. West v Atkins, 487 US 42, 48 (1988).

III

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a) requires that the

complaint set forth “a short and plain statement of the claim

showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” A complaint that

Case 3:09-cv-00140-JW Document 19 Filed 03/23/10 Page 2 of 4
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

fails to state the specific acts of the defendant that violated the

plaintiff’s rights fails to meet the notice requirements of Rule

8(a). Hutchinson v United States, 677 F2d 1322, 1328 n5 (9th Cir

1982). Rule 8(d) requires each allegation to be “simple, concise,

and direct.” Failure to comply with the requirements set forth in

Rule 8 may be the basis for dismissal. McHenry v Renne, 84 F3d

1172, 1179 (9th Cir 1996) (affirming dismissal of complaint that was

“argumentative, prolix, replete with redundancy, and largely

irrelevant”).

Like plaintiff’s original complaint (Doc #1) his first

amended complaint (Doc #9) has several deficiencies that make it

necessary for plaintiff to file a second amended complaint that is

shorter and more focused. Although the court recognizes that pro se

pleadings must be construed liberally, it does not have the

resources to read through voluminous pleadings and exhibits to make

plaintiff’s case for him. 

IV

Good cause appearing, the first amended complaint is

DISMISSED WITH LEAVE TO FILE A SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT containing

all related claims against all defendants that plaintiff wishes to

proceed against in this action. The pleading must be simple,

concise and direct and must state clearly and succinctly how each

and every defendant is alleged to have violated plaintiff’s

federally-protected rights. The pleading must include the caption

and civil case number used in this order and the words SECOND 

Case 3:09-cv-00140-JW Document 19 Filed 03/23/10 Page 3 of 4
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

AMENDED COMPLAINT on the first page. Failure to file a proper

amended complaint within thirty (30) days of this order will result

in the dismissal of this action. 

Plaintiff is advised that the second amended complaint

will supersede the original complaint and all other pleadings. 

Claims and defendants not included in the second amended complaint

will not be considered by the court. See King v Atiyeh, 814 F2d

565, 567 (9th Cir 1987).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 

VAUGHN R WALKER

United States District Chief Judge

G:\PRO-SE\VRW\CR.09\Caranchini-09-140-dwlta-2.wpd

Case 3:09-cv-00140-JW Document 19 Filed 03/23/10 Page 4 of 4