United States District Court, E.D. California
SCREENING ORDER DISMISSING SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT AND GRANTING LEAVE TO AMEND (ECF No. 15)
BARBARA A. McAULIFFE, Magistrate Judge.
I. Screening Requirement and Standard
Plaintiff Alton Jefferson ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On February 12, 2014, the Court dismissed Plaintiff's first amended complaint and granted Plaintiff leave to amend within thirty days. Plaintiff's second amended complaint, filed on March 12, 2014, is currently before the Court for screening.
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); 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 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, 1949 (2009) (citing Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly , 550 U.S. 544, 555, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 1964-65 (2007)). While a plaintiff's allegations are taken as true, 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).
Prisoners proceeding pro se in civil rights actions are entitled to have their pleadings liberally construed and to have any doubt resolved in their favor. Hebbe v. Pliler , 627 F.3d 338, 342 (9th Cir. 2010) (citations omitted). 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, 129 S.Ct. at 1949 (quotation marks omitted); Moss v. United States 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, 129 S.Ct. at 1949 (quotation marks omitted); Moss , 572 F.3d at 969.
II. Plaintiff's Allegations
Plaintiff is currently housed at Mule Creek State Prison in Ione, California. The events in his complaint are alleged to have occurred at Pleasant Valley State Prison. Plaintiff names (1) Dr. Jardini, (2) LVN A. Medley, (3) LVN M. Springer, and (4) LVN Sely as defendants.
Plaintiff alleges as follows:
It started on a ducated visit on 2-18-11 with Dr. Jardini who conspired with clinics correctional staff to take away my wheelchair he himself prescribed for me for a duration of two (2) months because of severe pain that I incurred from severe neuropathy (he diagnosed twice) and swelling also from Valley Fever. Even when a try was made to get out of wheelchair, failed because of severe pain making me fall. When I was pushed back to the clinic to inform Dr. Jardini he refused to see me for examination to see sufficient time for healing was not up yet and by his alleged recommendation I was left to suffer a worse condition on a walker. Explaining this to LVN Springer, LVN Medly and LVN Sely (that I could not make it up to the clinic because of continued pain and swelling) that I would need them to bring my insulin and medications, they told me no because the Dr. (Jardini) said I could walk, thus denying me medical attention and medication which cause me to have an imbalance severely in my walk and forgetfulness as well as a worsen state of neuropathy, etc. Each day I complained about my pain & inability to walk again denied.
(ECF No. 15, p. 2.)
Plaintiff further alleges:
Defendant Dr. Jardini caused my balance to become an imbalance when he knew and diagnosed me with severe neuropathy twice as my neuropathy was worsened by the cocci virus of the Valley Fever for which he recommended and prescribed me with a wheelchair for the period of two (2) months. On 2-18-11 during a visit to check my condition, he expressed his decision was for me to maintain my stay in the wheelchair, but under his voice that the... custody wanted me out to avoid a transfer; in conspiracy with custody. When I fell from the severe pain trying to stand and walk, I was caught, set back in the wheelchair, taken back to the yard clinic requesting to see Dr. Jardini, who refused to come out and see me as I called out for him with my cellmate as staff c/o's was preventing me. [¶] LVN Medly was informed of this by me and that I was in pain seriously as she was delivering meds to the buildings. Then LVN Medley said that the Dr. meaning Jardini said "that I could walk." Being a protocol, she refused to at least call for me a wheelchair and also refused to give me my insulin knowing that I am a chronic care ...