Hernandez v. Santa Clara Valley Health Care et al

Filing 12

ORDER OF DISMISSAL. Signed by Judge Jeffrey S. White on 9/8/11. (jjoS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/8/2011)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) SANTA CLARA COUNTY; SANTA ) CLARA VALLEY HEALTH & ) HOSPITAL SYSTEM ADULT ) CUSTODY HEALTH CARE; SANTA CLARA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF ) ) CORRECTIONS, ) ) Defendants. __________________________________ ) PAUL HERNANDEZ, JR., No. C 11-2740 JSW (PR) ORDER OF DISMISSAL INTRODUCTION 18 Plaintiff, an inmate at the Santa Clara County Jail proceeding pro se, filed this 19 20 rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The complaint was dismissed with leave to 21 amend. Plaintiff filed an amended complaint that does not cure the deficiencies in the 22 original complaint. The Court now reviews the complaint and dismisses it with leave to 23 amend. 24 25 DISCUSSION I. Standard of Review 26 Federal courts must engage in a preliminary screening of cases in which prisoners 27 seek redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The Court must identify cognizable claims or dismiss any portion 1 of the complaint, if the complaint “is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon 2 which relief may be granted,” or “seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune 3 from such relief.” Id. § 1915A(b). Pro se pleadings must be liberally construed. 4 Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep't, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1990). Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2) requires only "a short and plain statement 5 6 of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief." "Specific facts are not 7 necessary; the statement need only '"give the defendant fair notice of what the . . . . claim 8 is and the grounds upon which it rests."'" Erickson v. Pardus, 127 S. Ct. 2197, 2200 9 (2007) (citations omitted). Although in order to state a claim a complaint “does not need 10 detailed factual allegations, . . . a plaintiff's obligation to provide the 'grounds of his 11 'entitle[ment] to relief' requires more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic 12 recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do. . . . Factual allegations must 13 be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level." Bell Atlantic Corp. v. 14 Twombly, 127 S. Ct. 1955, 1964-65 (2007) (citations omitted). A complaint must proffer 15 "enough facts to state a claim for relief that is plausible on its face." Id. at 1974. Pro se 16 pleadings must be liberally construed. Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep't, 901 F.2d 696, 17 699 (9th Cir. 1990). 18 To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two elements: 19 (1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and 20 (2) that the alleged violation was committed by a person acting under the color of state 21 law. West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988). 22 II. 23 Legal Claims The original complaint was dismissed because the only defendants were the 24 “Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System Adult Custody Health Care” and the 25 Santa Clara County Department of Corrections, and Plaintiff had not allegeda policy that 26 amounted to deliberate indifference to his Eighth Amendment rights and that was the 27 moving force behind his failure to receive adequate medical treatment, as is required to 28 succeed on a claim against a local government entity. See Plumeau v. School Dist. #40 1 County of Yamhill, 130 F.3d 432, 438 (9th Cir. 1997). Plaintiff was given leave to 2 amend to so allege or, alternatively, to name individual defendants whose actions or 3 omissions by them that proximately caused Plaintiff to go without the medical treatment 4 he needed. Plaintiff has done neither. The amended complaint adds the County of Santa 5 Clara as a defendant, but does not allege a policy or that the policy was the moving force 6 behind his inadequate medical care, as required by Plumeau. This case will be dismissed 7 because, as Plaintiff was warned, he did not cure the deficiencies in his original 8 complaint. 9 CONCLUSION 10 In light of the foregoing, this case is DISMISSED. 11 The clerk shall enter judgment and close the file. 12 IT IS SO ORDERED. 13 DATED: September 8, 2011 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 JEFFREY S. WHITE United States District Judge 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 FOR THE 3 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 4 5 PAUL HERNANDEZ JR, Case Number: CV11-02740 JSW 6 Plaintiff, CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 7 v. 8 9 SANTA CLARA VALLEY HEALTH AND HOSPITAL SYSTEM ADULT CUSTODY HEALTH CARE et al, 10 Defendant. 11 12 13 14 15 / I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California. That on September 8, 2011, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing said copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery receptacle located in the Clerk's office. 16 17 20 Paul Hernandez T-05919 North Kern State Prison PO Box 4999 Delano, CA 93216 21 Dated: September 8, 2011 18 19 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Richard W. Wieking, Clerk By: Jennifer Ottolini, Deputy Clerk

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?