The opinion of the court was delivered by: Dennis L. Beck United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM WITH LEAVE TO AMEND ECF No. 1 RESPONSE DUE WITHIN THIRTY DAYS
Plaintiff Alvin Snyder ("Plaintiff") is a prisoner in the custody of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation ("CDCR"). Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On November 18, 2011, Plaintiff filed his complaint. ECF No. 1.
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
2 is entitled to relief . . . ." Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). Detailed factual allegations are not required, but 3
"[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements, 4 do not suffice." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (citing Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 5
U.S. 544, 555 (2007)). Plaintiff must set forth "sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a 6 claim to relief that is plausible on its face.'" Id. (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570). While factual 7 allegations are accepted as true, legal conclusions are not. Id. 8
II. Summary of Complaint 9
Plaintiff was previously incarcerated at Wasco State Prison ("WSP") in Wasco, California, where the events giving rise to this action occurred. Plaintiff names as Defendants: Doctor John Doe, lieutenant K. W. Yeager, sergeant John Doe, correctional officer Jane Doe, and correctional officer Bohon.
Plaintiff alleges the following. On May 14, 2010, while housed in the protective custody housing unit (also known as the sensitive needs yard), Plaintiff was escorted by Defendant Jane Doe. Plaintiff was escorted from the MRI trailer parked behind the medical building, into the medical building. Plaintiff was in handcuffs and leg chains. Plaintiff ordered to sit and face the wall once inside. Plaintiff believed that he was in danger, because general custody inmates walked freely behind Plaintiff. Plaintiff stated to Defendant sergeant John Doe that he felt in danger. Sergeant John Doe escorted Plaintiff into a private room a few feet away. Plaintiff expressed his concerns, at which point Sergeant John Doe escorted him back to the same chair to sit and face the wall. Plaintiff was left there by John Doe.
Plaintiff heard a doctor open an exam door and state to Defendant Bohon that an unidentified general custody inmate was here just two weeks ago. Defendant Bohon was sitting down and instructed the doctor to send the general custody inmate out. Plaintiff was attacked without provocation. Plaintiff found himself on the floor with pain in his right eye, and was bleeding from the right side of his face. Plaintiff contends that he is legally blinded in his right eye, and has nerve damage in the right side of his face. Defendant Yeager is responsible for the safety and security of all inmates at WSP.
Plaintiff alleges that Defendants acted with deliberate indifference in violation of the Eighth
Amendment, and were negligent. Plaintiff requests compensatory damages and ...