ORDER D I S M I S S I N G A M E N D E D
COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO AMEND
(ECF No. 14)
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT DUE
WITHIN THIRTY DAYS SCREENING ORDER
Plaintiff Joaquin Jay, II ("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 this action on April 19, 2010 and consented to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction on July 8, 2010. (ECF Nos. 1 & 6.) The Court screened Plaintiff's original complaint, finding that he had failed to state any claims upon which relief may be granted and giving him leave to amend. (ECF No. 8.) After significant delay, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint on August 24, 2011. (ECF No. 14.) No other parties have appeared.
The First Amended Complaint is now before the Court for screening. For the reasons stated below, the Court finds that Plaintiff has failed to state any claims 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 claims that Defendant Medical Department of Fresno County Jail violated his Eighth Amendment right to adequate medical care.
Plaintiff alleges as follows: In January 2010, Plaintiff became very ill. Medical staff attributed Plaintiff's illness to his canteen purchases, and refused to treat him. Because of this denial, Plaintiff's illness became worse to the point where he could not hold down or process solid foods. In March 2010, Plaintiff was transported to the local hospital where he was examined by a doctor, who prescribed medication and recommended a pureed diet. Through May 13, 2011, Plaintiff was unable to hold down or process solid food.*fn1
Plaintiff seeks 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 ...