Maldonado et al v. Medical Employees et al

Filing 16

ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO AMEND signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 12/11/2013. Amended Complaint due by 1/15/2014. (Attachments: # 1 Complaint Form)(Lundstrom, T)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ISRAEL MALDONADO, 12 13 14 15 Plaintiff, v. MEDICAL EMPLOYEES, et al., Defendants. 16 17 18 19 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No.: 1:12-cv-01824-LJO-SAB (PC) ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT, WITH LEAVE TO AMEND, FOR FAILURE TO STATE A COGNIZABLE CLAIM [ECF No. 5] Plaintiff Israel Maldonado is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed the instant complaint on October 23, 2012. 20 I. 21 SCREENING REQUIREMENT 22 The Court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against a 23 governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The 24 Court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are legally 25 “frivolous or malicious,” that “fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted,” or that “seeks 26 monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). 27 28 A complaint must contain “a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief. . . .” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). Detailed factual allegations are not required, but 1 1 “[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements, 2 do not suffice.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (citing Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 3 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)). Plaintiff must demonstrate that each named defendant personally 4 participated in the deprivation of his rights. Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 676-677; Simmons v. Navajo County, 5 Ariz., 609 F.3d 1011, 1020-1021 (9th Cir. 2010). 6 Prisoners proceeding pro se in civil rights actions are still entitled to have their pleadings 7 liberally construed and to have any doubt resolved in their favor, but the pleading standard is now 8 higher, Wilhelm v. Rotman, 680 F.3d 1113, 1121 (9th Cir. 2012) (citations omitted), and to survive 9 screening, Plaintiff’s claims must be facially plausible, which requires sufficient factual detail to allow 10 the Court to reasonably infer that each named defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged. Iqbal, 11 556 U.S. at 678-79; Moss v. U.S. Secret Serv., 572 F.3d 962, 969 (9th Cir. 2009). The “sheer 12 possibility that a defendant has acted unlawfully” is not sufficient, and “facts that are ‘merely 13 consistent with’ a defendant’s liability” falls short of satisfying the plausibility standard. Iqbal, 556 14 U.S. at 678; Moss, 572 F.3d at 969. 15 II. 16 COMPLAINT ALLEGATIONS 17 Plaintiff did not consent for his blood to be drawn by a recycled syringe used by the nurse. 18 Plaintiff was in chains and shackles and he noticed that the needle was not clean. Plaintiff asked for a 19 new needle, but the nurse declined to exchange the needle in front of him. 20 III. 21 DISCUSSION 22 A. Deliberate Indifference to a Serious Medical Need 23 Plaintiff’s vague and conclusory allegations fail to rise to the level of a constitutional violation. 24 For Eighth Amendment claims arising out of medical care in prison, Plaintiff “must show (1) a 25 serious medical need by demonstrating that failure to treat [his] condition could result in further 26 significant injury or the unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain,” and (2) that “the defendant’s 27 response to the need was deliberately indifferent.” Wilhelm v. Rotman, 680 F.3d 1113, 1122 (citing 28 Jett v. Penner, 439 F.3d 1091, 1096 (9th Cir. 2006)). Deliberate indifference is shown by “(a) a 2 1 purposeful act or failure to respond to a prisoner’s pain or possible medical need, and (b) harm caused 2 by the indifference.” Wilhelm, 680 F.3d at 1122 (citing Jett, 439 F.3d at 1096). The requisite state of 3 mind is one of subjective recklessness, which entails more than ordinary lack of due care. Snow v. 4 McDaniel, 681 F.3d 978, 985 (9th Cir. 2012) (citation and quotation marks omitted); Wilhelm, 680 5 F.3d at 1122. 6 In order for Plaintiff to state a cognizable claim, he must amend to link a particular defendant 7 by either name or “Doe” reference, and indicate the nature and extent of any injuries he suffered as a 8 result of the testing. Wilhelm, 680 F.3d at 1122. Accordingly, Plaintiff will be given the opportunity 9 to amend this claim. 10 IV. 11 CONCLUSION AND ORDER 12 For the reasons stated, Plaintiff’s complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be 13 granted. Plaintiff is granted leave to file an amended complaint within thirty (30) days. Noll v. 14 Carlson, 809 F.2d 1446, 1448-49 (9th Cir. 1987). Plaintiff may not change the nature of this suit by 15 adding new, unrelated claims in his amended complaint. George v. Smith, 507 F.3d 605, 607 (7th Cir. 16 2007) (no “buckshot” complaints). 17 Plaintiff’s amended complaint should be brief, Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a), but must state what each 18 named defendant did that led to the deprivation of Plaintiff’s constitutional or other federal rights. 19 Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678. “The inquiry into causation must be individualized and focus on the duties 20 and responsibilities of each individual defendant whose acts or omissions are alleged to have caused a 21 constitutional deprivation.” Leer v. Murphy, 844 F.2d 628, 633 (9th Cir. 1988). Although accepted as 22 true, the “[f]actual allegations must be [sufficient] to raise a right to relief above the speculative level . 23 . . .” Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555 (citations omitted). 24 Finally, an amended complaint supersedes the original complaint, Forsyth v. Humana, Inc., 25 114 F.3d 1467, 1474 (9th Cir. 1997); King v. Atiyeh, 814 F.2d 565, 567 (9th Cir. 1987), and must be 26 “complete in itself without reference to the prior or superseded pleading,” Local Rule 220. “All 27 causes of action alleged in an original complaint which are not alleged in an amended complaint are 28 /// 3 1 waived.” King, 814 F.2d at 567 (citing to London v. Coopers & Lybrand, 644 F.2d 811, 814 (9th Cir. 2 1981)); accord Forsyth, 114 F.3d at 1474. 3 Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that: 4 1. The Clerk’s Office shall send Plaintiff a civil rights complaint form; 5 2. Plaintiff’s complaint, filed October 23, 2012, is dismissed for failure to state a claim; 6 3. Within thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint; and 7 8 4. If Plaintiff fails to file an amended complaint in compliance with this order, this action will be dismissed, with prejudice, for failure to state a claim. 9 10 11 12 13 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: December 11, 2013 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 4

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?