Source: https://casetext.com/case/williams-v-thompson-5
Timestamp: 2018-10-19 05:12:33
Document Index: 568760162

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 1914', '§ 1915', '§ 1915', '§ 1983', '§ 1915', '§ 1983']

Williams v. Thompson, No. CIV S-11-0701 DAD P. | Casetext
No. CIV S-11-0701 DAD P. (E.D. Cal. Apr. 6, 2011)
United States District Court, E.D. CaliforniaApr 6, 2011
No. CIV S-11-0701 DAD P.
Plaintiff is required to pay the statutory filing fee of $350.00 for this action. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914(a) 1915(b)(1). An initial partial filing fee of $2.59 will be assessed by this order. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). By separate order, the court will direct the appropriate agency to collect the initial partial filing fee from plaintiff's prison trust account and forward it to the Clerk of the Court. Thereafter, plaintiff will be obligated to make monthly payments of twenty percent of the preceding month's income credited to plaintiff's prison trust account. These payments will be collected and forwarded by the appropriate agency to the Clerk of the Court each time the amount in plaintiff's account exceeds $10.00, until the filing fee is paid in full. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2).
Plaintiff's complaint appears to state cognizable claims for relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). If the allegations of the complaint are proven, plaintiff has a reasonable opportunity to prevail on the merits of this action against defendants Wooden and Thompson. However, the court will not order service of the complaint on defendants Warden Virga and Sergeant Perry. Supervisory personnel are generally not liable under § 1983 for the actions of their employees under a theory ofrespondeat superior and, therefore, when a named defendant holds a supervisorial position, the causal link between him and the claimed constitutional violation must be specifically alleged.See Fayle v. Stapley, 607 F.2d 858, 862 (9th Cir. 1979); Mosher v. Saalfeld, 589 F.2d 438, 441 (9th Cir. 1978). Vague and conclusory allegations concerning the involvement of official personnel in civil rights violations are not sufficient. See Ivey v. Board of Regents, 673 F.2d 266, 268 (9th Cir. 1982). Here, plaintiff has failed to present any factual allegations concerning defendants Virga and Perry and their connection to the alleged constitutional violation.
1. Plaintiff's March 14, 2011 application to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. No. 2) is granted.
2. Plaintiff is obligated to pay the statutory filing fee of $350.00 for this action. Plaintiff is assessed an initial partial filing fee of $2.59. All fees shall be collected and paid in accordance with this court's order to the Director of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation filed concurrently herewith.
3. Service of the complaint is appropriate for the following defendants: Correctional Officer Wooden and Correctional Officer Thompson.
4. The Clerk of the Court shall send plaintiff two USM-285 forms, one summons, an instruction sheet, and a copy of the complaint filed March 14, 2011.
d. Three copies of the endorsed complaint filed March 14, 2011.
Plaintiff hereby submits the following documents in compliance with the court's order filed _______________:
one [#] [#]
_____ completed summons form; _____ completed USM-285 forms; and _____ true and exact copies of the complaint filed [date]. DATED: _______________. ______________________________ Plaintiff