Jackson v. California Correctional Health Care Services
Filing
6
ORDER OF DISMISSAL. Signed by Judge Thelton E. Henderson on 1/3/2017. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(tlS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/3/2017)
1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
6
7
ANDRE JACKSON,
Case No.
16-cv-6410-TEH
Plaintiff,
8
v.
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
9
CALIFORNIA CORRECTIONAL HEALTH
CARE SERVICES,
11
United States District Court
Northern District of California
10
Defendant.
12
13
Plaintiff, an inmate at Correctional Training Facility,
14
filed this pro se civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
15
The original complaint was dismissed with leave to amend and
16
Plaintiff has filed an amended complaint.
17
I
18
Federal courts must engage in a preliminary screening of
19
cases in which prisoners seek redress from a governmental entity
20
or officer or employee of a governmental entity.
21
1915A(a).
22
the complaint, or any portion of the complaint, if the complaint
23
“is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which
24
relief may be granted,” or “seeks monetary relief from a
25
defendant who is immune from such relief.”
26
Pleadings filed by pro se litigants, however, must be liberally
27
construed.
28
Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep’t., 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir.
28 U.S.C. §
The Court must identify cognizable claims or dismiss
Id. § 1915A(b).
Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 342 (9th Cir. 2010);
1
2
1990).
To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must
3
allege two essential elements:
4
Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and (2)
5
that the alleged violation was committed by a person acting under
6
the color of state law.
7
8
9
(1) that a right secured by the
West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988).
II
Plaintiff states that he was notified of a potential breach
regarding his personal health information.
A laptop computer
that may have included Plaintiff’s health information was stolen
11
United States District Court
Northern District of California
10
out of a car of a prison health care worker.
12
password protected but was not encrypted.
13
damages and the identity of the health care worker who had the
14
computer stolen.
15
The computer was
Plaintiff seeks money
Plaintiff has failed to state a cognizable claim because he
16
has failed to identify a right secured by the Constitution or
17
laws of the United States that was violated.
18
Plaintiff is asserting a violation of his health privacy; he is
19
not entitled to relief.
20
Accountability Act of `1996 (“HIPAA”), Pub. L. 104-191, 110 Stat.
21
1936 (codified as amended in scattered sections of 42 U.S.C.)
22
“provides for no private right of action.”
23
Document Solutions, 499 F.3d 1078, 1080 (9th Cir. 2007); see,
24
e.g., Seaton v. Mayberg, 610 F.3d 530, 533 (9th Cir. 2010)
25
(citing Webb and dismissing prisoner's claim under HIPAA for
26
disclosure of his medical records).
27
potential release of his medical information due to theft
28
violated his constitutionally-protected privacy rights fails to
To the extent
The Health Insurance Protability and
2
Webb v. Smart
Plaintiff assertion that
1
state a claim because “prisoners do not have a constitutionally
2
protected expectation of privacy in prison treatment records when
3
the state has a legitimate penological interest in access to
4
them.”
5
with leave to amend to address the legal standards set forth
6
above.
7
original complaint and Plaintiff has failed to demonstrate a
8
cognizable claim.
9
futile this case is dismissed with prejudice.
Seaton, 610 F.3d at 534.
The amended complaint is substantially similar to the
Because allowing further amendment would be
10
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
12
13
14
The complaint was dismissed
III
For the foregoing reasons, the Court hereby orders as
follows:
1.
Plaintiff’s complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice for
failure to state a claim.
15
2.
16
IT IS SO ORDERED.
17
The Clerk shall close this case.
Dated: 1/3/2017
18
________________________
THELTON E. HENDERSON
United States District Judge
19
20
G:\PRO-SE\TEH\CR.16\Jackson6410.dis.docx
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
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?