Campa v. Zamora et al

Filing 20

ORDER DISMISSING First Amended Complainti WITH LEAVE TO AMEND, signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 3/4/2015. Amended Complaint Due Within Thirty Days. (Attachments: # 1 Amended Complaint Form) (Marrujo, C)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
ANTHONY J. CAMPA,

CASE NO. 1: 12-cv-01897-AWO-MJS (PC)

12
Plaintiff,

13
v.

14
15

ORDER DISMISSING FIRST AMENDED
COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO AMEND
(ECF NO. 17)

L.D. ZAMORA, et al.,

AMENDED COMPLAINT
THIRTY (30) DAYS

Defendants.

16

DUE

WITHIN

17
SCREENING ORDER

18
19

I.

Plaintiff Anthony J. Campa, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

pauperis, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (ECF Nos. 1 & 5.)
The Court dismissed Plaintiff’s Complaint and granted Plaintiff leave to amend. (ECF
No. 13.) Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint is now before the Court for screening.
(ECF No. 17.)
II.

SCREENING REQUIREMENT
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

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

raised claims that are legally “frivolous, malicious,” or 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). “Notwithstanding any filing fee,
or any portion thereof, that may have been paid, the court shall dismiss the case at any
time if the court determines that . . . the action or appeal . . . fails to state a claim on
which relief may be granted.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).
III.

SUMMARY OF COMPLAINT

8

Plaintiff is incarcerated and is representing himself in this action. In the Court’s

9

prior screening order, Plaintiff was advised that his use of very small print, minimal

10

spacing between words, and failure to double space between sentences rendered the

11

Complaint almost illegible. The same is true of Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint.

12

While Plaintiff increased his spacing between sentences, the Court is still unable to

13

decipher Plaintiff’s allegations.

14

Plaintiff will be given one more opportunity to file an amended complaint that is

15

legible. Given Plaintiff’s extremely small print, it may be beneficial to Plaintiff to type his

16

amended complaint or have someone type or print it for him. The following sections of

17

this order notify Plaintiff of the general legal standards applicable to any future pleading.

18

IV.

ANALYSIS

19

A.

20

Section 1983 “provides a cause of action for the ‘deprivation of any rights,

21

privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws’ of the United States.”

22

Wilder v. Virginia Hosp. Ass’n, 496 U.S. 498, 508 (1990) (quoting 42 U.S.C. § 1983).

23

Section 1983 “‘is not itself a source of substantive rights,’ but merely provides ‘a method

24

for vindicating federal rights conferred elsewhere.’” Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386,

25

393-94 (1989) (quoting Baker v. McCollan, 443 U.S. 137, 144, n. 3 (1979)).

Section 1983

26

To state a claim under Section 1983, a plaintiff must allege two essential

27

elements: (1) that a right secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States was

28

violated and (2) that the alleged violation was committed by a person acting under the
2

1
2
3

color of state law. See West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988); see also Ketchum v.
Cnty. of Alameda, 811 F.2d 1243, 1245 (9th Cir. 1987).
B.

Formatting of the Complaint

4

A complaint must contain “a short and plain statement of the claim showing that

5

the pleader is entitled to relief . . . .” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). Detailed factual allegations

6

are not required, but “[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action,

7

supported by mere conclusory statements, do not suffice.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S.

8

662, 678 (2009) (citing Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)). Plaintiff

9

must set forth “sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is

10

plausible on its face.’” Id. Facial plausibility demands more than the mere possibility

11

that a defendant committed misconduct and, while factual allegations are accepted as

12

true, legal conclusions are not. Id.

13

Local Rule 130(c) provides that “[d]ocuments shall be double-spaced except for

14

the identification of counsel, title of the action, category headings, footnotes, quotations,

15

exhibits and descriptions of real property.” In submitting an amended complaint in

16

compliance with this order, Plaintiff must print legibly in a font size that is easily read and

17

leave sufficient space between words. As stated above, in order to ensure the legibility

18

of Plaintiff’s complaint, it is recommended that he type it.

19

C.

20

It appears that Plaintiff has attributed numerous violations of his rights to

Potential Unrelated Claims

21

seventeen different Defendants. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 18(a) allows a party to

22

“join, as independent or alternative claims, as many claims as it has against an opposing

23

party.” However, Rule 20(a)(2) permits a plaintiff to sue multiple defendants in the same

24

action only if “any right to relief is asserted against them jointly, severally, or in the

25

alternative with respect to or arising out of the same transaction, occurrence, or series of

26

transactions or occurrences,” and there is a “question of law or fact common to all

27

defendants.” “Thus multiple claims against a single party are fine, but Claim A against

28
3

1
2
3

Defendant 1 should not be joined with unrelated Claim B against Defendant 2. Unrelated
claims against different defendants belong in different suits . . .” George v. Smith, 507
F.3d 605, 607 (7th Cir. 2007) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g)).

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

Plaintiff is again advised that if he opts to amend and raises factually unrelated
claims against different Defendants in a single action, the impermissibly joined claims
will be severed and dismissed from this action. Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint
must clearly state for each Defendant: 1) who that Defendant is; 2) what that Defendant
did; 3) what right that Defendant violated; and 4) how that Defendant's actions violated
that right. Defendants may not be sued collectively; each Defendant is only liable for the
injuries caused by his or her own actions. See Leer v. Murphy, 844 F.2d 628, 633 (9th
Cir. 1988) (“The inquiry into causation must be individualized and focus on the duties
and responsibilities of each individual defendant whose acts or omissions are alleged to
have caused a constitutional deprivation.”).
V.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER
It is unclear whether Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint states a claim for relief

given its illegibleness. The Court will grant Plaintiff an opportunity to file an amended
complaint. Noll v. Carlson, 809 F.2d 1446, 1448-49 (9th Cir. 1987). Plaintiff should note
that although he has been given the opportunity to amend, it is not for the purposes of
adding new claims. George v. Smith, 507 F.3d 605, 607 (7th Cir. 2007). Plaintiff should
carefully read this Screening Order and focus his efforts on curing the deficiencies set
forth above.
Finally, Plaintiff is advised that Local Rule 220 requires that an amended
complaint be complete in itself without reference to any prior pleading. As a general
rule, an “amended complaint supersedes the original” complaint. See Loux v. Rhay, 375
F.2d 55, 57 (9th Cir. 1967). Therefore, in an amended complaint, as in an original
complaint, each claim and the involvement of each defendant must be sufficiently
alleged.

Here, the amended complaint should be clearly and boldly titled “Second

28
4

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

Amended Complaint,” refer to the appropriate case number, and be an original signed
under penalty of perjury. Plaintiff's amended complaint should be brief. Fed. R. Civ. P.
8(a). Although accepted as true, the “[f]actual allegations must be [sufficient] to raise a
right to relief above the speculative level . . . .” Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555 (citations
omitted).
Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:
1.

Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint (ECF No. 17.) is DISMISSED;

2.

The Clerk's Office shall send Plaintiff (1) a blank civil rights amended

9

complaint form and (2) a copy of his signed First Amended Complaint filed

10
11

September 30, 2013;
3.

12
13

Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint within thirty (30) days from service
of this Order; and

4.

14

If Plaintiff fails to file an amended complaint in compliance with this order,
the Court will dismiss this action, with prejudice, for failure to state a claim,

15

failure to comply with a court order, and failure to prosecute, subject to the

16

“three strikes” provision set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

17

Silva v. Di

Vittorio, 658 F.3d 1090, 1098 (9th Cir. 2011).

18
19

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20
21

Dated:

March 4, 2015

/s/

Michael J. Seng

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
5