The opinion of the court was delivered by: Michael J. Seng United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER DISMISSING FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO AMEND (ECF No. 11.)SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT DUE WITHIN THIRTY DAYS SCREENING ORDER
Plaintiff Richard Alan Lawson ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner in the custody of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation ("CDCR"), and proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed this action on June 8, 2009. (ECF No. 1.) Plaintiff's consent to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction was filed June 18, 2009. (ECF. No. 5.)
Plaintiff's original Complaint was dismissed with leave to amend for failure to state a claim. (ECF No. 10.) He filed a First Amended Complaint on December 17, 2010. (ECF No. 11.) The First Amended Complaint is now before the Court for screening. For the reasons set forth below, the Court finds that Plaintiff's Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
II. SCREENING REQUIREMENTS
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 fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1), (2). "Notwithstanding any filing fee, or any portion thereof, that may have been paid, the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that . . . the action or appeal . . . fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted." 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).
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). Detailed factual allegations are not required, but "[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not suffice." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009) (citing Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)). Plaintiff must set forth "sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim that is plausible on its face.'" Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. at 1949 (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555). While factual allegations are accepted as true, legal conclusions are not. Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. at 1949.
III. SUMMARY OF COMPLAINT
Plaintiff, who is currently incarcerated at the California Institution for Men ("CIM") in Chino, California, brings this action alleging violation of his right to adequate medical care under the Eighth Amendment and use of excessive force. Plaintiff named the following individuals as Defendants to this action: John Doe #5 (Deputy Sheriff Sargent), John Does #1-4 (Deputy Sheriffs), and Jane Doe (Licensed Vocational Nurse). All Defendants are employed by the Kern County Jail Central Receiving Facility.
Plaintiff alleges the following: On October 1, 2008, Plaintiff was arrested. He was held by the Kern County Sheriff's Department at their Receiving Facility until his arraignment. Plaintiff was placed in mechanical ankle restraints by Deputy #1. Plaintiff, is diabetic and, as a result, his feet and ankles were swollen. He informed Deputy #1 that the restraints were too tight and cutting off circulation to his feet. Plaintiff was told to be quiet by Deputy #1, who then placed additional wrist and waist cuffs on Plaintiff and ordered Plaintiff to walk into the holding cell. Plaintiff again informed Deputy #1 that the ankle restraints were too tight, causing Plaintiff pain and leaving Plaintiff unable to walk. Deputy #1 pushed Plaintiff from behind, causing Plaintiff to fall over a pile of laundry, hit the floor face first, and be rendered unconscious. Plaintiff sustained severe injuries to his nose and mouth: Plaintiff's dentures were imbedded in his mouth, he had difficulty breathing through his nose, and he was bleeding heavily from his nose and mouth.
Deputies #1 through 4 were standing above Plaintiff when he became conscious. They refused to help him stand. They also refused him medical attention. Eventually, the nurse threw gauze at Plaintiff for his nose and informed Plaintiff that he would receive medical attention when he was transferred.
Plaintiff was still on the ground in restraints when Deputy Sheriff Sergeant approached and began questioning the Deputies about the incident. Plaintiff again requested medical attention. He did not receive any until he was transferred.
Plaintiff seeks punitive and ...