Medina v. Mendocino County et al

Filing 5

ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 11/16/12. (Attachments: # 1 Appendix Certificate of Service)(cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/16/2012)

Download PDF
1 2 3 *E-Filed 11/16/12* 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 8 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 11 12 PORFIRIO MEDINA, 13 Plaintiff, No. C 12-3767 RS (PR) ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO AMEND v. 14 THOMAS D. ALLMAN, MENDOCINO COUNTY, and 16 DOES 1–100; 15 Defendants. 17 / 18 INTRODUCTION 19 This is a federal civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The Court now 20 21 reviews the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in 22 forma pauperis (Docket Nos. 2 & 4) is GRANTED. DISCUSSION 23 24 25 A. Standard of Review A federal court must conduct a preliminary screening in any case in which a prisoner 26 seeks redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 27 See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). In its review, the court must identify any cognizable claims and 28 No. C 12-3767 RS (PR) ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT 1 dismiss any claims that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim upon which relief may 2 be granted or seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. See id. 3 § 1915A(b)(1),(2). Pro se pleadings must be liberally construed. See Balistreri v. Pacifica 4 Police Dep’t, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1988). A “complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim 5 6 to relief that is plausible on its face.’” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009) 7 (quoting Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). “A claim has facial 8 plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the 9 reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.” Id. (quoting United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 Twombly, 550 U.S. at 556). Furthermore, a court “is not required to accept legal conclusions 11 cast in the form of factual allegations if those conclusions cannot reasonably be drawn from 12 the facts alleged.” Clegg v. Cult Awareness Network, 18 F.3d 752, 754–55 (9th Cir. 1994). 13 To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two essential elements: 14 (1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and 15 (2) that the alleged violation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law. 16 See West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988). 17 B. 18 Legal Claims Plaintiff, who is being civilly detained under California’s Sexually Violent Predator 19 Act, alleges that defendants violated his (1) due process, (2) equal protection, (3) Eighth 20 Amendment, and (4) First Amendment rights. Plaintiff’s complaint, however, fails to 21 provide sufficient details, such as the specific names of defendants, their specific actions, and 22 the dates and places where the alleged violations occurred. It is not sufficient to name only 23 Mendocino County and the supervising sheriff as defendants. 24 Accordingly, the complaint is DISMISSED with leave to file an amended 25 complaint within 30 days from the date of this order. The amended complaint must 26 include the caption and civil case number used in this order (12-3767 RS (PR)) and the 27 words FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT on the first page. Because an amended complaint 28 No. C 12-3767 RS (PR) ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT 2 1 completely replaces the previous complaints, plaintiff must include in his first amended 2 complaint all the claims he wishes to present and all of the defendants he wishes to sue. See 3 Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1262 (9th Cir. 1992). Any claims not raised in the first 4 amended complaint will be deemed waived. Plaintiff may not incorporate material from the 5 prior complaint by reference. Failure to file an amended complaint in accordance with this 6 order will result in dismissal of this action without further notice to plaintiff. 7 It is plaintiff’s responsibility to prosecute this case. Plaintiff must keep the Court 8 informed of any change of address by filing a separate paper with the clerk headed “Notice 9 of Change of Address.” He must comply with the Court’s orders in a timely fashion or ask United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 for an extension of time to do so. Failure to comply may result in the dismissal of this 11 action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). The Clerk shall terminate Docket 12 Nos. 2 and 4. 13 IT IS SO ORDERED. 14 DATED: November 16, 2012 RICHARD SEEBORG United States District Judge 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 No. C 12-3767 RS (PR) ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT 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?