The opinion of the court was delivered by: Sheri Pym United States Magistrate Judge
I hereby certify that this Order was served by First Class mail postage prepaid, to Plaintiff G. Mixon, at his address of record in this action on this date. Civil Rights Forms CV66A was included with such mailing to the plaintiff.
ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO AMEND
INTRODUCTION On November 29, 2012, plaintiff George Edward Mixon, a California state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a civil rights complaint in this court pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff alleges his Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment rights were violated when he was kept restrained on "potty watch" for eight days.
After careful review and consideration of the allegations of the complaint under the relevant standards, the court finds for the reasons discussed hereafter that certain of the named defendants are immune from suit, and that the complaint fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted against any defendant. Accordingly, the court finds the complaint subject to dismissal, but grants plaintiff leave to amend, as discussed below.
ALLEGATIONS OF THE COMPLAINT
Plaintiff is a prisoner at the California State Prison - Los Angeles County ("CSP-LA") in Lancaster. Defendants are CSP-LA and the following CSP-LA correctional officers, who are each named in both their individual and official capacities: Lieutenant Rivera; Sergeant R. Moreno; Sergeant R. Brown; Officer Pollard; and Officer Sirro.
On December 12, 2011, following a visit with his wife, correctional staff took plaintiff into custody and placed him on "potty watch" for eight days. Plaintiff's wife was also subjected to a full body search by defendant Rivera and another officer.
During the eight days plaintiff was on "potty watch," defendant Moreno had plaintiff triple shackled with restraints put on so tightly that his waist and feet later became swollen and infected. The restraints also caused plaintiff, who suffers from cardiopulmonary problems, difficulty breathing. Defendant Moreno also prevented plaintiff from using the sink in the cell by taping it or causing it to be taped closed. For seven days, plaintiff was denied access to drinking water. For the eight days on "potty watch," plaintiff was denied a change of closing and forced to wear underwear and clothing soiled in his own excrement. Despite his pleas to defendants Pollard and Sirro, he was denied a change of clothing, blankets, and was therefore left cold and wallowing in his own filth.
To date, no formal charges or administrative rules violations have been filed against plaintiff related to these events and/or for contraband. Plaintiff has attempted to obtain a director's level decision on his adminstrative appeal, but has been thwarted by demands that plaintiff name the Chief Officer of Inmate Appeals.