The opinion of the court was delivered by: Dennis L. Beck United States Magistrate Judge
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RECOMMENDING ACTION BE DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM ECF No. 1 OBJECTIONS DUE WITHIN 14 DAYS
Plaintiff Angel Ayala ("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 February 27, 2012, 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. Id. § 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." Id. § 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 formerly incarcerated at Kern Valley State Prison ("KVSP") in Delano, California, where the events giving rise to this action occurred. Plaintiff names as Defendants: lieutenant institutional gang investigator ("IGI") J. Harden; assistant IGIs M. Lozano and C. Chamberlin; and special agents of the Special Service Unit for CDCR Richard Nadeau and David Perez.
Plaintiff alleges the following. On April 14, 2010, Defendant Harden placed Plaintiff in administrative segregation based on information regarding threats against staff. On June 1, 2010, Defendants Harden, Chamberlin, and Lozano served Plaintiff with a gang validation package. Defendant Harden approved the package and submitted it to the special service unit agents for approval. Defendant Lozano submitted one source of information, the use of a symbol, which Plaintiff contends is actually a part of Mexican heritage, and not gang-affiliated. Defendant Chamberlin submitted all the disclosure forms which indicated that Plaintiff had the capability to associate with known gang members. Plaintiff contends that having the capability is not actual association. Plaintiff contends that the validation was wrongful because it relied upon false, unreliable, and insufficient evidence.
Defendants Nadeau and Perez concluded that the information was reliable and approved Plaintiff's validation. Plaintiff contends that he was discriminated against on the basis of his Mexican nationality, and is used against inmates of Mexican or Hispanic descent.
Plaintiff requests as relief that all gang validation information be expunged from his file, release from the security housing unit, and compensatory damages.