(PC) Wren v. Mule Creek Prison et al

Filing 32

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 7/19/2021 DISMISSING 25 Amended Complaint with leave to amend; PARTIALLY GRANTING 28 Motion to Amend the Complaint; and GRANTING Plaintiff 30 days from the date of this order to file an amended complaint. (Henshaw, R)

Case 2:21-cv-00903-KJM-KJN Document 32 Filed 07/19/21 Page 1 of 4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

JEFFREY CHARLES WREN,

12
13
14
15

No. 2:21-cv-0903 KJM KJN P

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

WARDEN MULE CREEK PRISON, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17

Plaintiff, a state prisoner, proceeds pro se with this civil rights action pursuant to 42

18

U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed the action in the Fresno Division of this court; on May 19, 2021,

19

the action was transferred to the undersigned. On July 1, 2021, plaintiff’s amended complaint

20

was dismissed and he was granted leave to file an amended complaint. On July 2, 2021, plaintiff

21

filed an amended complaint, and on July 13, 2021, plaintiff filed a motion to amend.

22

Plaintiff’s July 2, 2021 amended complaint includes the same factual allegations found

23

implausible in the prior screening orders. (ECF Nos. 19 at 8; 24 at 2-3.) He also again includes

24

his claim seeking the return of monies, despite the court’s prior admonition that plaintiff may not

25

seek return of property through a federal civil rights action. (ECF No. 19 at 6-7.) Plaintiff

26

includes no additional facts that support a cognizable civil rights claim. Finally, plaintiff again

27

seeks relief he cannot obtain through a civil rights action: release from prison. Plaintiff may only

28

obtain release from prison through a petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254.
1

Case 2:21-cv-00903-KJM-KJN Document 32 Filed 07/19/21 Page 2 of 4
1

(ECF No. 19 at 9.) For all of these reasons, plaintiff’s July 2, 2021 amended complaint must also

2

be dismissed.

3

In his motion to amend, plaintiff repeats his desire to get out of prison, and the court is not

4

unsympathetic to plaintiff’s plight. However, such relief is not available through this civil rights

5

action. Rather, this case was opened based on plaintiff’s claims concerning alleged violations of

6

plaintiff’s constitutional rights while housed at Mule Creek State Prison. In an abundance of

7

caution, plaintiff is granted one final opportunity in which to file an amended complaint that

8

complies with this order, as well as the court’s prior screening orders. However, plaintiff is

9

cautioned that if he fails to comply with such orders, the undersigned will recommend that this

10

action be dismissed based on such failure. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

11

Leave to Amend

12

To state a claim under § 1983, a plaintiff must demonstrate: (1) the violation of a federal

13

constitutional or statutory right; and (2) that the violation was committed by a person acting under

14

the color of state law. See West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988); Jones v. Williams, 297 F.3d

15

930, 934 (9th Cir. 2002). An individual defendant is not liable on a civil rights claim unless the

16

facts establish the defendant’s personal involvement in the constitutional deprivation or a causal

17

connection between the defendant’s wrongful conduct and the alleged constitutional deprivation.

18

See Hansen v. Black, 885 F.2d 642, 646 (9th Cir. 1989); Johnson v. Duffy, 588 F.2d 740, 743-44

19

(9th Cir. 1978). That is, plaintiff may not sue any official on the theory that the official is liable

20

for the unconstitutional conduct of his or her subordinates. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 679

21

(2009). The requisite causal connection between a supervisor’s wrongful conduct and the

22

violation of the prisoner’s constitutional rights can be established in a number of ways, including

23

by demonstrating that a supervisor’s own culpable action or inaction in the training, supervision,

24

or control of his subordinates was a cause of plaintiff’s injury. Starr v. Baca, 652 F.3d 1202,

25

1208 (9th Cir. 2011).

26

The amended complaint must contain a caption that identifies each defendant and bears

27

the case number of this case. Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(a). The individuals identified as defendants in

28

the body of the amended complaint must match those set forth in the caption of the complaint.
2

Case 2:21-cv-00903-KJM-KJN Document 32 Filed 07/19/21 Page 3 of 4
Plaintiff may not change the nature of this suit by alleging new, unrelated claims. 1

1
2

See Fed. R. Civ. P. 20(a)(2). Plaintiff is cautioned that his continued violation of court orders

3

will result in a recommendation that this case be dismissed. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

4

Plaintiff is reminded that the court cannot refer to a prior pleading in order to make

5

plaintiff’s amended complaint complete. Local Rule 220 requires that an amended complaint be

6

complete in itself without reference to any prior pleading. This requirement exists because, as a

7

general rule, an amended complaint supersedes the original complaint. See Ramirez v. County of

8

San Bernardino, 806 F.3d 1002, 1008 (9th Cir. 2015) (“an ‘amended complaint supersedes the

9

original, the latter being treated thereafter as non-existent.’” (internal citation omitted)). Once

10

plaintiff files an amended complaint, the original pleading no longer serves any function in the

11

case. Therefore, in an amended complaint, as in an original complaint, each claim and the

12

involvement of each defendant must be sufficiently alleged.

13

Finally, plaintiff is required to file his amended complaint using the court’s form.

14

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

15

1. Plaintiff’s July 2, 2021 amended complaint (ECF No. 25) is dismissed with leave to

16

amend.

17

2. Plaintiff’s motion to amend (ECF No. 28) is partially granted.

18

3. Plaintiff is granted thirty days from the date of this order to file an amended complaint

19

that complies with the instant order, as well as the June 29, 2021, and July 1, 2021 orders; and

20

with the requirements of the Civil Rights Act, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and the Local

21

Rules of Practice. The amended complaint must bear the docket number assigned to this case and

22

1

23
24
25
26
27
28

A plaintiff may properly assert multiple claims against a single defendant. Fed. Rule Civ. P.
18. Also, a plaintiff may join multiple defendants in one action where “any right to relief is
asserted against them jointly, severally, or in the alternative with respect to or arising out of the
same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions and occurrences” and “any question of law
or fact common to all defendants will arise in the action.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 20(a)(2). Unrelated
claims against different defendants must be pursued in separate lawsuits. See George v. Smith,
507 F.3d 605, 607 (7th Cir. 2007). This rule is intended “not only to prevent the sort of morass [a
multiple claim, multiple defendant] suit produce[s], but also to ensure that prisoners pay the
required filing fees -- for the Prison Litigation Reform Act limits to 3 the number of frivolous
suits or appeals that any prisoner may file without prepayment of the required fees. 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(g).” George, 507 F.3d at 607.
3

Case 2:21-cv-00903-KJM-KJN Document 32 Filed 07/19/21 Page 4 of 4
1

must be labeled “Amended Complaint.” The amended complaint must be filed using the court’s

2

form civil rights complaint.

3

4. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send plaintiff the form for filing a civil rights

4

complaint.

5

Dated: July 19, 2021

6
7
8

wren0903.mta2

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4