The opinion of the court was delivered by: Michael J. Seng United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER DISMISSING PLAINTIFF'S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO AMEND (ECF NO. 10) AMENDED COMPLAINT DUE WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS SECOND SCREENING ORDER
Plaintiff Don Valencia, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this civil rights action on September 21, 2010 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Compl., ECF No. 1.) The Court screened the Complaint and dismissed it for failure to state a claim, but allowed Plaintiff to file an amended complaint provided he do so by April 2, 2012. (Order Dismissing Compl., ECF No. 6; Order Extending Time, ECF No. 9.)
Now before the Court for screening is Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint. (First Am. Compl., ECF No. 10.)
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). The Court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are legally "frivolous, malicious," or 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).
Section 1983 "provides a cause of action for the 'deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws' of the United States." Wilder v. Virginia Hosp. Ass'n, 496 U.S. 498, 508 (1990) (quoting 42 U.S.C. § 1983). Section 1983 is not itself a source of substantive rights, but merely provides a method for vindicating federal rights conferred elsewhere. Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386, 393--94 (1989).
III. SUMMARY OF FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
Plaintiff repeats allegations in his original Complaint to the effect that on August 23, 2008 while housed at the Sierra Conservation Camp at Jamestown ("SCC") he was attacked in the yard by another inmate. (First Am. Compl. at 3.) He adds the allegation that "according to witnesses the Defendants saw the attack but did nothing to stop it until their supervisor, Lt. Pena, triggered the alarm." (Id. at 3.) He "sustained multiple severe injuries on [his] body including damage to face, and head." (Id.)
The following Defendants, in their respective individual and official capacities failed to protect Plaintiff from the attack in violation of his Eighth Amendment rights: (1) Harris, Correctional Officer, (2) Fell, Correctional Officer, (3) Riggs, Correctional Officer, (4) Webb, Correctional Officer, (5) Hittle, Correctional Officer, (6) Anderson, Correctional Officer, (7) Dean, Correctional Sergeant, and (8) Scott, Correctional Officer. (Id. at 2-3.)
He seeks a federal investigation of the incident underlying this action, compensatory damages and costs and fees. (Id. at 3.)
To state a claim under § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two essential elements: (1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and (2) that the alleged violation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law. See West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. ...