The opinion of the court was delivered by: Sheila K. Oberto United States Magistrate Judge
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RECOMMENDING DISMISSAL OF ACTION
FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM UNDER SECTION 1983
THIRTY-DAY OBJECTION DEADLINE
Findings and Recommendations Following Screening of Amended Complaint
Plaintiff Jerry Fuentes is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Defendants Yates and Igbinosa removed this action from Fresno County Superior Court on March 17, 2011. 28 U.S.C. § 1441(b). On March 8, 2012, the Court dismissed Plaintiff's complaint, with leave to amend, for failure to state a claim under section 1983.
28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Plaintiff filed an amended complaint on October 29, 2012.
II. Screening Requirement and Standard
The Court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against a governmental entity and/or against an officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). Plaintiff's complaint, or any portion thereof, is subject to dismissal if it is frivolous or malicious, if it fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or if it seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1), (2).
A complaint must contain "a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief. . . ." Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). Detailed factual allegations are not required, but "[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not suffice," Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678, 129 S.Ct. 1937 (2009) (citing Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555, 127 S.Ct. 1955 (2007)), and courts "are not required to indulge unwarranted inferences," Doe I v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 572 F.3d 677, 681 (9th Cir. 2009) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). While factual allegations are accepted as true, legal conclusions are not. Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678.
While prisoners proceeding pro se in civil rights actions are still entitled to have their pleadings liberally construed and to have any doubt resolved in their favor, the pleading standard is now higher, Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 342 (9th Cir. 2010) (citations omitted), and to survive screening, Plaintiff's claims must be facially plausible, which requires sufficient factual detail to allow the Court to reasonably infer that each named defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged, Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678 (quotation marks omitted); Moss v. U.S. Secret Service, 572 F.3d 962, 969 (9th Cir. 2009). The sheer possibility that a defendant acted unlawfully is not sufficient, and mere consistency with liability falls short of satisfying the plausibility standard. Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678 (quotation marks omitted); Moss, 572 F.3d at 969.
In his amended complaint, Plaintiff alleges that while he was housed at Pleasant Valley State Prison (PVSP) between 2004 and 2009, he contracted Valley Fever and became extremely ill. Plaintiff alleges that he begged for medical care and a transfer to a different prison, and although he was eventually transferred, he still is still suffering from having been neglected.
Plaintiff alleges that Defendants James Yates, Warden, and Felix Igbinosa, Chief Medical Officer, "failed, negligently, with deliberate indifference and 'Callous disregard to render proper medical and custodial Aid by refusing to treat plaintiff's Valley Fever' and by refusing to [transfer] him before the conditions got worse." (Doc. 19, Amend. Comp., p. 3.) Plaintiff alleges that his muscles, joints, and organs are no longer functioning normally, ...