The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gary S. Austin United States Magistrate Judge
SECOND SCREENING ORDER ORDER DISMISSING AMENDED A COMPLAINT FOR FAILURE TO STATE CLAIM, WITH LEAVE TO AMEND
ORDER FOR CLERK TO SEND PLAINTIFF A
1983 COMPLAINT FORM
THIRTY DAY DEADLINE TO FILE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
I. RELEVANT PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Plaintiff Jacquelyn Uhlman ("Plaintiff") is a former state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed the Complaint commencing this action on February 13, 2008. (Doc. 1.) The Court screened the Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A and issued an order on July 23, 2009, dismissing the Complaint for failure to state a claim, with leave to amend. (Doc. 6.) On August 18, 2009, Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint, which is now before the Court for screening. (Doc. 7.)
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). Thecourt 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 is required to contain only "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, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 1964-65 (2007)). Plaintiff must set forth "sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim that is plausible on its face.'" Id. The mere possibility of misconduct falls short of meeting this plausibility standard. Id. at 1949-50; Moss v. U.S. Secret Service, 572 F.3d 962, 969 (9th Cir. 2009). While factual allegations are accepted as true, legal conclusions are not. Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. at 1949.
III. SUMMARY OF AMENDED COMPLAINT
Plaintiff is a former state prisoner. At the time of the events at issue in the complaint, Plaintiff was incarcerated at the Central California Women's Facility ("CCWF") in Chowchilla, California. Plaintiff names as defendants Suryadevara (Chief Medical Officer), Dr. Iyer (Chief Physician), Reeves (GYN), Dr. Sakata, Robert Sillen MD, Federal Court Appointed Receiver, and Tilton (CDCA Secretary) ("Defendants").
Plaintiff alleges as follows in the Amended Complaint. Plaintiff suffered from serious abdominal pain. She was seen by Dr. Sakata who treated her with pain medication. Plaintiff also saw Dr. Reeves and made numerous visits to the prison emergency room ("ER"). Plaintiff was in excruciating pain most of the time. Once, she was refused treatment by Dr. Lawin, prison ER doctor, who stated "the problem has gone on too long," too many lawsuits, too many 602's. Plaintiff also saw Dr. Iyer in the ER who diagnosed her with diticulitis (sic). Another time, Plaintiff was treated by the ER doctor with constipation medication. Plaintiff was not properly diagnosed.
In December 2005, Plaintiff began filing prison appeals requesting to see an outside specialist to discuss having a hysterectomy. Dr. Iyer refused to send her to an outside specialist and also denied her ADA request, stating, "I never received a ducat." Dr. Sakata and Dr. Lawin ordered numerous CT scans. Tests were repeated because of Dr. Reeves' denial that Plaintiff had a gynecological problem. The CT scans and an ultrasound showed an enlarged uterus.
Plaintiff had follow-up visits with Dr. Reeves and Dr. Sakata. Dr. Sakata ordered lab tests for tumor markers which came back high. He made an "urgent" Physician's Request for services on May 5, 2008, stating he did not want to go against his superior Dr. Reeves. Dr. Reeves crossed out Dr. Sakata's "urgent" request, stating that he called Dr. Iyers. Still in denial, he ordered lab tests, and the tumor markers came back high.
Plaintiff was humiliated by other inmates because of her constant pain. She begged for pain medication on a daily basis. She was called names. LVN Kelly Cluecico made phone calls on Plaintiff's request to the nursing staff for a chart review so they could figure out what was wrong, but they never did.
Plaintiff had surgery at Madera Community Hospital on June 19, 2008. Since the surgery, because her uterus was pushed into the lower bowel, Plaintiff is unable to have bowel movements without taking several kinds of medications. Plaintiff's condition was caused by neglect. She suffered for two and ...