IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
February 6, 2012
JOSHUA DANIEL MILLS, PLAINTIFF,
TIM VIRGA, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gregory G. Hollows United States Magistrate Judge
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding with retained counsel. He seeks relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and has paid the filing fee. This proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 302 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
Plaintiff states that he was transferred from California State Prison-Sacramento (CSP-Sac) to Pelican Bay State Prison (PBSP), but his life is in danger at PBSP. Plaintiff seeks to be transferred back to CSP-Sac. Plaintiff also states that staff at CSP-Sac took his prescription sunglasses and as a result he has been unable to go outside as the sun causes migraine headaches. Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief, a return to CSP-Sac and his sunglasses, and monetary damages. However, the only named defendants are the Warden of CSP-Sac and the California Department of Corrections. With respect to the transfer, plaintiff has failed to identify a defendant who can provide relief as it does not appear the warden of CSP-Sac has the ability to order a transfer from PBSP and the entity itself is not a proper defendant. With respect to the sunglasses claim, plaintiff has failed to identify anyone who actually took the sunglasses.
Within twenty-one days, plaintiff shall show cause why the claims in the original complaint should not be screened out, or plaintiff may file an amended complaint.
In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that within twenty-one days, plaintiff shall show cause why the claims in the original complaint should not be screened out, or plaintiff may file an amended complaint.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.