Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Gary Dale Barger v. Kern County Sheriff's Dept.

November 28, 2012

GARY DALE BARGER, PLAINTIFF,
v.
KERN COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPT., ET AL.,
DEFENDANTS.



ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO AMEND (Doc. 1) FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT DUE WITHIN FOURTEEN DAYS

I. Factual and Procedural Background

Gary Dale Barger*fn1 ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Doc. 1. On November 8, 2012, Plaintiff filed his complaint which is currently before the Court. Doc. 1.

II. Screening

A. Screening Standard

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).

"'Under § 1915A, when determining whether a complaint states a claim, a court must accept as true all allegations of material fact and must construe those facts in the light most favorable to the plaintiff.'" Hamilton v. Brown, 630 F.3d 889. 892-93 (9th Cir. 2011) (quoting Resnick v. Warden Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.2000). "'Additionally, in general, courts must construe pro se pleadings liberally.'" Id. A complaint, or portion thereof, should only be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted "if it is clear that no relief could be granted under any set of facts that could be proved consistent with the allegations." See Hishon v. King & Spalding, 467 U.S. 69, 73 (1984) (citing Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46 (1957)); see also Synagogue v. United States, 482 F.3d 1058, 1060 (9th Cir. 2007); NL Industries, Inc. v. Kaplan, 792 F.2d 896, 898 (9th Cir. 1986). In determining whether to dismiss an action, the Court must accept as true the allegations of the complaint in question, and construe the pleading in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, and resolve all doubts in the plaintiff's favor. Jenkins v. McKeithen, 395 U.S. 411, 421-22 (1969); Daniels-Hall v. National Educ. Ass'n, 629 F.3d 992, 998 (9th Cir. 2010).

B. Plaintiff's Complaint

Plaintiff is incarcerated at California State Prison, Corcoran (CSPC) in Corcoran California, and is suing under section 1983 against forty-nine defendants, the majority of whom are judges, prosecutors, court staff and parole officers. Doc. 1 at 3. As relief Plaintiff seeks monetary damages for the "extensive beatings, time, pain, anguish and suffering." Doc. 1 at 4.

Plaintiff's complaint is rambling and incoherent. Doc. 1. Plaintiff makes conclusory allegations regarding an illegal parole hold and illegal court proceeding. Doc. 1. Plaintiff alleges:

My claim is based on a[n] illegal, unfounded parole hold, of which snowballed into what became the case against me. The agenc[ies] involved went through great lengths to detain me, and confiscated highly classified military documents to the national security agency-"Star Wars Program." The work I do for the NSA and the military is on our military's satellite defense system and the whole episode is based on those documents also a[n] illegal court proceeding. I am in the process of unraveling my past so-called criminal history w[ith] a series of civil suits and writs of habeas corpus to prove my innocence. This is not the first time this has happened.

Doc. 1 at 4. Then is appears that Plaintiff attaches a letter where Plaintiff addresses U.S. Attorney Benjamen Wagner wherein Plaintiff writes:

Benjamen, I have no options. This prison opens, holds, reads all of my correspondence to Washington to you. They withheld the form I'm sending. Queen Jane, Maria Shriver and Tipper Gore made it possible for me to resubmit my consent to your jurisdiction . . . I'm in over my head in FOIPA [numbers] and they've closed some. So following all this week, I'm filing civil litigation suits on the FBI, of course, and even the National Security Division. I've just sent the [numbers] to Ann, Catherine and Priscilla in Washington and I am suspecting forgery on some of the closures, so it's on them to investigate. .

Doc. 1 ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.