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.

Bob Bejarano v. Kathleen Allison

September 16, 2011

BOB BEJARANO,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
KATHLEEN ALLISON, ET AL.,
DEFENDANTS.



ORDER DISMISSING FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO AMEND (ECF No.10)

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT DUE WITHIN THIRTY DAYS

SCREENING ORDER

I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Plaintiff Bob Bejarano ("Plaintiff") is a 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 12, 2011. (ECF No. 1.) This action was consolidated with case 1:11-cv-00873-OWW-DLB on August 29, 2011. (ECF No. 9.)

Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint, filed May 31, 2011, is now before the Court for screening. (ECF No. 10.) For the reasons set forth 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 brings this action for violations of the Eighth Amendment. Plaintiff names the following individuals as Defendants: Kathleen Allison, T. Wan, A. F. Hernandez, D. Goss, F. Vasquez, D. Best, Gomez, R. Hall, D. Foston, D. Artis, and J. Doe.

Plaintiff alleges as follows: Plaintiff was placed on contraband watch on February 17, 2010 until February 20, 2010 by Defendant Doe. During this time he suffered headaches, muscle cramps, stress, anxiety, depression, and rashes. Plaintiff filed a 602 grievance regarding his time in contraband watch and verbally complained to Defendant Best. Because of his grievance and complaints, Plaintiff was again placed in contraband watch where he suffered the same ailments between April 13, 2010 and April 16, 2010. Plaintiff tried to file grievances after the second contraband watch, but all have been denied.

Plaintiff seeks monetary damages, compensatory damages, punitive damages, and exemplary damages.

IV. ANALYSIS

The Civil Rights Act under which this action was ...


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.