Brown v. Miller et al
Filing
10
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 2/23/16 RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed for failure to state a claim. Referred to Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr.; Objections to F&R due within 14 days.(Dillon, M)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
DEXTER BROWN,
12
13
No. 2:15-CV-1687-GEB-CMK-P
Plaintiff,
vs.
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
14
MONICA MILLER, et al.,
15
Defendants.
16
17
18
19
/
Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to
42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the court is plaintiff’s complaint (Doc. 1).
The court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief
20
against a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. See 28 U.S.C.
21
§ 1915A(a). The court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if it: (1) is frivolous or
22
malicious; (2) fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted; or (3) seeks monetary relief
23
from a defendant who is immune from such relief. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1), (2). Moreover,
24
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure require that complaints contain a “. . . short and plain
25
statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2).
26
This means that claims must be stated simply, concisely, and directly. See McHenry v. Renne,
1
1
84 F.3d 1172, 1177 (9th Cir. 1996) (referring to Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(e)(1)). These rules are satisfied
2
if the complaint gives the defendant fair notice of the plaintiff’s claim and the grounds upon
3
which it rests. See Kimes v. Stone, 84 F.3d 1121, 1129 (9th Cir. 1996). Because plaintiff must
4
allege with at least some degree of particularity overt acts by specific defendants which support
5
the claims, vague and conclusory allegations fail to satisfy this standard. Additionally, it is
6
impossible for the court to conduct the screening required by law when the allegations are vague
7
and conclusory.
8
Plaintiff names as defendants Monica Miller, Special Agent for the Federal
9
Bureau of Investigations, and Alison Claire, United States Magistrate Judge. According to
10
plaintiff, defendant Claire received “reports” from plaintiff – in the form of a number civil rights
11
complaints against various government officials – of “attempted murders” but failed to redress
12
his grievances. Plaintiff claims that “defendant Monica Miller failed to act upon reports, and
13
corroborating circumstantial evidence indicating District Court Judge Alison Claire is
14
deliberately preventing plaintiff from redressing acts of attempted murder by delaying the
15
screening of civil complaints.”
16
Plaintiff’s allegations are vague and conclusory in that they do not indicate any
17
specific conduct by the named defendants such that they could be on fair notice of plaintiff’s
18
claims. Morever, plaintiff’s underlying claim – that defendant Claire acted improperly with
19
respect to screening his civil rights complaints – is barred by the doctrine of absolute judicial
20
immunity. See Schucker v. Rockwood, 846 F.2d 1202, 1204 (9th Cir. 1988) (per curiam).
21
Because it does not appear possible that the deficiencies identified herein can be
22
cured by amending the complaint, plaintiff is not entitled to leave to amend prior to dismissal of
23
the entire action. See Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1126, 1131 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc).
24
///
25
///
26
///
2
1
2
Based on the foregoing, the undersigned recommends that this action be dismissed
for failure to state a claim.
3
These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District
4
Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within 14 days
5
after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written
6
objections with the court. Responses to objections shall be filed within 14 days after service of
7
objections. Failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal.
8
See Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).
9
10
11
12
DATED: February 23, 2016
______________________________________
CRAIG M. KELLISON
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
3
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?