The opinion of the court was delivered by: Michael J. Seng United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER DISMISSING PLAINTIFF'S ACTION WITH PREJUDICE FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM (ECF NO. 17) CLERK TO CLOSE FILE DISMISSAL IS SUBJECT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) SECOND SCREENING ORDER
Plaintiff Ruben Mijel Chavira, a state prisoner incarcerated at Kern Valley State Prison ("KVSP") is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California on October 11, 2011 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Compl., ECF No. 1), and transferred to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California on October 14, 2011. (Order of Transfer, ECF No. 3.)
Plaintiff's Complaint was dismissed for failure to state a claim but he was given leave to file an amended complaint. (Order Dismss. Compl., ECF No. 16.)
Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint (First Am. Compl,, ECF No. 17) which is now before the Court for screening.
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 reiterates claims in his original Complaint that during 2009-2011 while at KVSP a doctor told him he would be sent to an outside hospital for surgery relating to a metal plate in his left hand, but he was not sent out for such surgery. (First Am. Compl., at 4.) He additionally alleges that "[h]e was discriminated [against]" in this regard. (Id.)
He names as Defendant R.C. Ruth, Health Care Manager and Director of Nurses at KVSP. (Id. at 3-4.)
He seeks money damages for pain and suffering and medical and mental distress. (Id. at 4.)
A. Pleading Requirements ...