Jackson v. Kelso et al

Filing 9

ORDER RECLASSIFYING CASE AND DISMISSING WITHE LEAVE TO AMEND. Amended Complaint due by 2/4/2013. Signed by Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton on 1/4/13. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(nah, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/4/2013)

Download PDF
1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 OAKLAND DIVISION 6 7 GEORGE JACKSON, Plaintiff, 8 vs. 9 ORDER RECLASSIFYING CASE AND DISMISSING WITH LEAVE TO AMEND J. CLARK KELSO, et. al., Defendants. 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 No. C 12-5046 PJH (PR) / 12 13 This case was opened when Jackson filed a habeas petition with the court (nature of 14 suit 530). However, a review of the petition indicates that plaintiff is raising claims 15 regarding prison conditions (nature of suit 555). The clerk shall reclassify the case on the 16 docket as a civil rights case, nature of suit 555. Plaintiff has been granted leave to proceed 17 in forma pauperis. 18 19 20 DISCUSSION A. Standard of Review Federal courts must engage in a preliminary screening of cases in which prisoners 21 seek redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 22 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). In its review the court must identify any cognizable claims, and 23 dismiss any claims which are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim upon which relief may 24 be granted, or seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. Id. at 25 1915A(b)(1),(2). Pro se pleadings must be liberally construed. Balistreri v. Pacifica Police 26 Dep't, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1990). 27 28 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2) requires only "a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief." "Specific facts are not necessary; 1 the statement need only '"give the defendant fair notice of what the . . . . claim is and the 2 grounds upon which it rests."'" Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 93 (2007) (citations 3 omitted). Although in order to state a claim a complaint “does not need detailed factual 4 allegations, . . . a plaintiff's obligation to provide the 'grounds’ of his 'entitle[ment] to relief' 5 requires more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a 6 cause of action will not do. . . . Factual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief 7 above the speculative level." Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007) 8 (citations omitted). A complaint must proffer "enough facts to state a claim to relief that is 9 plausible on its face." Id. at 570. The United States Supreme Court has recently explained the “plausible on its face” standard of Twombly: “While legal conclusions can provide the 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 framework of a complaint, they must be supported by factual allegations. When there are 12 well-pleaded factual allegations, a court should assume their veracity and then determine 13 whether they plausibly give rise to an entitlement to relief.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. 14 1937, 1950 (2009). 15 To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two essential 16 elements: (1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was 17 violated, and (2) that the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under the 18 color of state law. West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988). 19 B. 20 Legal Claims Plaintiff alleges that his constitutional rights for medical care and his due process 21 rights have been violated. However, other than stating defendants are violating the law and 22 should be criminally prosecuted, plaintiff has not discussed his medical needs and how 23 defendants have provided improper medical care. The complaint will be dismissed with 24 leave to amend, for plaintiff to identify specific defendants and describe how they were 25 deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs. The court cannot prosecute 26 defendants for violating California Penal Law, so plaintiff should not set forth such 27 allegations in an amended complaint. 28 /// 2 1 CONCLUSION 2 1. The clerk shall reclassify this case as a civil rights case (nature of suit 555). 3 2. The complaint is DISMISSED with leave to amend in accordance with the 4 standards set forth above. The amended complaint must be filed no later than February 4, 5 2013, and must include the caption and civil case number used in this order and the words 6 AMENDED COMPLAINT on the first page. Because an amended complaint completely 7 replaces the original complaint, plaintiff must include in it all the claims he wishes to 8 present. See Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1262 (9th Cir. 1992). He may not 9 incorporate material from the original complaint by reference. Failure to amend within the 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 designated time will result in the dismissal of these claims. 3. It is the plaintiff's responsibility to prosecute this case. Plaintiff must keep the 12 court informed of any change of address by filing a separate paper with the clerk headed 13 “Notice of Change of Address,” and must comply with the court's orders in a timely fashion. 14 Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of this action for failure to prosecute pursuant to 15 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). 16 17 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: January 4, 2013. PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON United States District Judge 18 19 G:\PRO-SE\PJH\CR.12\Jackson5046.dwlta.wpd 20 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?