Castillo v. Elmwood Mens Correctional Facility et al

Filing 6

ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 4/26/13. (Attachments: # 1 Appendix Certificate of Service)(cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/26/2013)

1

*E-filed 4/26/13*

2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

CHRISTOPHER JAMES CASTILLO,

11

ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT
WITH LEAVE TO AMEND

Plaintiff,

12

No. C 12-6511 RS (PR)

v.

13

ELMSWOOD CORRECTIONAL
14 FACILITY, et al.,
Defendants.

15

/

16

INTRODUCTION

17

This is a federal civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 by a pro se state

18
19

prisoner. The Court now reviews the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a).
DISCUSSION

20
21
22

A.

Standard of Review
A federal court must conduct a preliminary screening in any case in which a prisoner

23

seeks redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity.

24

See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). In its review, the court must identify any cognizable claims and

25

dismiss any claims that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim upon which relief may

26

be granted or seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. See id.

27

§ 1915A(b)(1),(2). Pro se pleadings must be liberally construed. See Balistreri v. Pacifica

28
No. C 12-6511 RS (PR)
ORDER OF DISMISSAL

1

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

2
3

to relief that is plausible on its face.’” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009)

4

(quoting Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). “A claim has facial

5

plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the

6

reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.” Id. (quoting

7

Twombly, 550 U.S. at 556). Furthermore, a court “is not required to accept legal conclusions

8

cast in the form of factual allegations if those conclusions cannot reasonably be drawn from

9

the facts alleged.” Clegg v. Cult Awareness Network, 18 F.3d 752, 754–55 (9th Cir. 1994).

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two essential elements:

11

that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and

12

that the alleged violation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law. See

13

West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988).

14

B.

15

(1)
(2)

Legal Claims
Plaintiff alleges in a conclusory fashion that defendant Arnt, a correctional officer at

16

the Santa Clara County Main Jail, repeatedly raped him in 2005 and 2006, in violation of the

17

Eighth Amendment. This is not sufficient to state a claim under § 1983. Accordingly, the

18

complaint is DISMISSED with leave to amend. In his amended complaint, plaintiff must

19

provide more details regarding the actual events, such as times, dates, places, and the specific

20

actions Arnt took.

21

Plaintiff’s other claims, which contain allegations regarding the poor quality of food,

22

the coldness of the cells, and the violent actions of other correctional officers, are

23

DISMISSED without prejudice because they involve different claims against different

24

defendants. If plaintiff wishes to pursue these claims, he must file a separate civil rights

25

action. Accordingly, Elmswood Correctional Facility, and Correctional Officers Kenedy,

26

Shonda Santos, Ledezma, and Duarte are TERMINATED as defendants.

27
28
No. C 12-6511 RS (PR)
ORDER OF DISMISSAL

2

1

Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint on or before June 1, 2013. The amended

2

complaint must address all the deficiencies listed above, and include the caption and civil

3

case number used in this order (12-6511 RS (PR)) and the words FIRST AMENDED

4

COMPLAINT on the first page. Because an amended complaint completely replaces the

5

previous complaints, plaintiff must include in his first amended complaint all the claims he

6

wishes to present and all of the defendants he wishes to sue. See Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d

7

1258, 1262 (9th Cir. 1992). Plaintiff may not incorporate material from the prior complaint

8

by reference. Failure to file an amended complaint in accordance with this order will result

9

in dismissal of this action without further notice to plaintiff.

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

It is plaintiff’s responsibility to prosecute this case. Plaintiff must keep the Court

11

informed of any change of address by filing a separate paper with the clerk headed “Notice of

12

Change of Address.” He must comply with the Court’s orders in a timely fashion or ask for

13

an extension of time to do so. Failure to comply may result in the dismissal of this

14

action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

15
16

IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: April 26, 2013
RICHARD SEEBORG
United States District Judge

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

No. C 12-6511 RS (PR)
ORDER OF DISMISSAL

3