FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION RECOMMENDING DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE OF PLAINTIFF'S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM (ECF No. 8) OBJECTIONS DUE WITHIN THIRTY DAYS
Plaintiff Wesley Kane Campbell ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On November 16, 2010, Plaintiff filed a complaint in 1:10-cv-02137-OWW-GBC. (ECF No. 1.) On November 29, 2010, Plaintiff filed a complaint in 1:10-cv-02200-SMS. These cases were consolidated and 1:10-cv-02200-SMS was closed. (ECF No. 7.) On December 14, 2010, Plaintiff's original complaints were dismissed for failure to state a claim. Plaintiff filed his First Amended Complaint on January 3, 2011. (ECF No. 8.)
This First Amended Complaint is now before the Court for screening. For the reasons set forth below, the Court finds that Plaintiff has failed to state any 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 alleges violations of his Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. Plaintiff names the following individuals as Defendants: Arnold Schwarzenegger, Lopez, Matthew Cate, all medical staff at California State Prison, and five unnamed correctional officers.
Plaintiff alleges as follows: Plaintiff states that unnamed correctional officers have been feeding him feces in his food. He further states that some of the trays could have HIV on them. Additionally, Defendant Cate has "copied a chrono" that falsely states that Plaintiff is a sex offender and, designates him as Special Needs Yard.
Plaintiff seeks to have the Special Needs Yard designation removed from his record and monetary damages.
The Civil Rights Act under which this action was filed provides:
Every person who, under color of [state law] . . . subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States . . . to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution . . . shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress. 42 U.S.C. § 1983. "Section 1983 . . . creates a cause of action for violations of the federal ...