The opinion of the court was delivered by: Susan P. Graber United States Circuit Judge
Plaintiff is a state prisoner who is proceeding pro se. He seeks relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the court is the complaint, filed September 15, 2008.
The court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners who seek relief against a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). Plaintiff alleges that prison officials at Sacramento County Main Jail have violated his constitutional rights by disciplining, defaming, and physically assaulting him. Specifically, Plaintiff alleges that Deputy Wall wrongly disciplined him on finding contraband in his cell, when the contraband belonged to his cell mate. Plaintiff further alleges that Deputy Wall and other staff confiscated his canteen items. Plaintiff contends that he complained to Sergeant Polete about Deputy Wall's actions, but that Sergeant Polete never responded. Plaintiff also states that he was moved to a different section of the jail, reserved for prisoners with disciplinary violations, for no reason. Plaintiff further asserts that he was moved again after being falsely accused of having physical contact with another prisoner.
Regarding his defamation claim, Plaintiff states that he was defamed when the staff wrongly accused him of engaging in sexual activity with other prisoners and participating in gang activity.
Plaintiff states that, on April 9, 2008, he was physically assaulted by Deputy Kacelek and Deputy Fitzgerald when they intervened in a fight between Plaintiff and another prisoner. Specifically, Plaintiff complains that Deputy Kacelek twisted his arms and slammed his face into the floor, making his lip bleed. He alleges that Deputy Fitzgerald constrained him and punched him on the side. Afterward, Plaintiff states, Deputy Kacelek took him to the medical staff but the medical staff did not do anything to treat his injuries. Plaintiff then alleges that he was punished by receiving several days of full restriction.
Plaintiff's claim appears to state a cognizable claim for relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. If the allegations of the complaint are proved, Plaintiff has a reasonable opportunity to prevail on the merits of this action.
The court, therefore, finds that service is appropriate and will direct service by the U.S. Marshal without prepayment of costs.
Plaintiff is informed that this action cannot proceed further until Plaintiff complies with this order. Plaintiff is warned that failure to comply with this order may result in dismissal of the action. See Local Rule 11-110.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Service of the complaint is appropriate for defendants Wall, Polete, Kacelek, and Fitzgerald.
2. The Clerk of the Court shall send Plaintiff four USM-285 forms, one summons, an instruction sheet, and a copy of the complaint filed September 15, 2008.
3. Within thirty days from the date of this order, Plaintiff shall complete the attached Notice of Submission of Documents and submit all of the following documents to the court:
a. The completed Notice of Submission ...