Reed v. New Port Tobacco Co.

Filing 5

ORDER DISMISSING CASE. Signed by Judge Thelton E. Henderson on 04/07/2011. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service)(tmi, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/7/2011)

Reed v. New Port Tobacco Co.

Doc. 5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Plaintiff, a pre-trial detainee presently housed at the Santa Rita (Alameda County) jail, and frequent litigant in federal court, has filed a pro se civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Doc. #1. Plaintiff also seeks leave to proceed in forma The action is v. NEWPORT TOBACCO COMPANY, Defendant. / TYRONE L. REED, Plaintiff, ORDER OF DISMISSAL No. C-11-1195 TEH (PR) IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

pauperis, which the court GRANTS in a separate order.

now before the Court for initial screening pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Federal courts must engage in a preliminary screening of cases in which prisoners seek redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a).

The court must identify cognizable claims or dismiss the complaint,

Dockets.Justia.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

or any portion of the complaint, if the complaint "is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted," or "seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief." Id. § 1915A(b). Pleadings filed by pro se Hebbe v. Pliler,

litigants, however, must be liberally construed.

627 F.3d 338, 341­42 (9th Cir. 2010); Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep't., 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1990). To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two essential elements: (1) that a right secured by the

Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and (2) that the alleged violation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law. West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988).

Here, Plaintiff has filed a civil rights action against a tobacco company for his apparent addiction to nicotine. 3. Doc. #1 at

Simply put, Plaintiff's allegations are insufficient to state a The action,

cognizable claim for relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. therefore, is DISMISSED with prejudice.

The Clerk is directed to terminate any pending motions as moot and close the file. IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED

04/07/2011 THELTON E. HENDERSON United States District Judge

G:\PRO-SE\TEH\CR.11\Reed-11-1195-order of dismissal.wpd

2