Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

SAAHDI COLEMAN v. STATE A CLAIM DIRECTOR OF CORRECTIONS AND

November 30, 2010

SAAHDI COLEMAN,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
STATE A CLAIM DIRECTOR OF CORRECTIONS AND
REHABILITATION, ET AL.,
DEFENDANTS.



(Doc. 17)

/

ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT, WITH LEAVE TO AMEND, FOR FAILURE TO THIRTY-DAY DEADLINE

I. Procedural History

Plaintiff Saahdi Coleman ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The action was commenced on February 24, 2010. (Doc. 1.) The complaint was screened by the Magistrate Judge and dismissed with leave to amend for failure to state a claim on July 7, 2009. (Doc. 9.) An amended complaint was filed on August 13, 2009. (Doc. 10.) On December 1, 2009, the Magistrate Judge screened the amended complaint and issued a finding and recommendations recommending the complaint be dismissed, with prejudice, for failure to state a claim. (Doc. 11.)

On January 6, 2010, Plaintiff filed an objection to the findings and recommendations stating that the Court was misconstruing his claim and he was bringing a claim for retaliation. (Doc. 12.) On January 7, 2010, Plaintiff filed a motion to amend and a second amended complaint. (Docs. 13, 16.) On January 8, 2010, the Magistrate Judge issued an order vacating the findings and recommendations dated December 1, 2009, and allowing Plaintiff to file an amended complaint.

(Doc. 15.) Currently before the Court is Plaintiff's complaint filed on January 28, 2010. (Doc. 17.) Although Plaintiff filed the document titled second amended complaint, the Court will construe this as the third amended complaint.

II. Screening Requirement

The Court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The Court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are legally "frivolous or malicious," that "fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted," or that "seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief." 28 U.S.C § 1915(e)(2)(B).

In determining whether a complaint states a claim, the Court looks to the pleading standard under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a). Under Rule 8(a), a complaint must contain "a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief." Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). "[T]he pleading standard Rule 8 announces does not require 'detailed factual allegations,' but it demands more than an unadorned, the-defendant-unlawfully-harmed-me accusation." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009) (quoting Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 554, 555 (2007)).

Under section 1983, Plaintiff must demonstrate that each defendant personally participated in the deprivation of his rights. Jones v. Williams, 297 F.3d 930, 934 (9th Cir. 2002). This requires the presentation of factual allegations sufficient to state a plausible claim for relief. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. at 1949-50; Moss v. U.S. Secret Service, 572 F.3d 962, 969 (9th Cir. 2009). "[A] complaint [that] pleads facts that are 'merely consistent with' a defendant's liability . . . 'stops short of the line between possibility and plausibility of entitlement to relief.'" Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. at 1949 (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 557). Further, although a court must accept as true all factual allegations contained in a complaint, a court need not accept a plaintiff's legal conclusions as true. Iqbal, 129

S. Ct. at 1949. "Threadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not suffice." Id. (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555).

III. Complaint Allegations

Plaintiff is currently incarcerated at Folsom State Prison. The third amended complaint is a seventy page document alleging unrelated incidents that have occurred from his detention at the Sacramento County Jail beginning on March 3, 2003 through June 13, 2007. The Plaintiff names defendants at multiple facilities. For the reasons stated, the complaint fails to state a cognizable claim. Plaintiff will be granted one final opportunity to amend the complaint to cure the deficiencies as described ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.