United States District Court, E.D. California
ORDER DISMISSING FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT, WITH LEAVE TO AMEND, FOR FAILURE TO STATE A COGNIZABLE CLAIM FOR RELIEF
[ECF No. 12]
STANLEY A. BOONE, Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiff Zane Hubbard is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
Now pending before the Court is Plaintiff's first amended complaint, filed September 8, 2014.
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 "fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted, " or that "seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief." 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).
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 (2009) (citing Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly , 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)). Plaintiff must demonstrate that each named defendant personally participated in the deprivation of his rights. Iqbal , 556 U.S. at 676-677; Simmons v. Navajo County, Ariz. , 609 F.3d 1011, 1020-1021 (9th Cir. 2010).
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, but the pleading standard is now higher, Wilhelm v. Rotman , 680 F.3d 1113, 1121 (9th Cir. 2012) (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 678-79; Moss v. U.S. Secret Serv. , 572 F.3d 962, 969 (9th Cir. 2009). The "sheer possibility that a defendant has acted unlawfully" is not sufficient, and "facts that are merely consistent with' a defendant's liability" falls short of satisfying the plausibility standard. Iqbal , 556 U.S. at 678; Moss , 572 F.3d at 969.
Plaintiff names J.C. Garcia, T. Perez, J.L. Williams, Hirachetta, De Ochoa, Rodriguez, Connie Gibson, Tumacder, and Kelloggs, as Defendants.
Plaintiff contends he has been subjected to cruel and unusual punishment by the Defendants.
On February 5, 2014, through electroconvulsive therapy Sergeant Garcia told him to "copulate with my mom, " and has threatened to kill me. De Ochoa and Rodriguez without reason accused Plaintiff of having "something in his ass, " and subjected Plaintiff to degrading strip searches in front of 28 other inmates who taunted Plaintiff.
Perez harassed Plaintiff names attempting to slander and insult Plaintiff's integrity as a man. J. L. Williams harassed Plaintiff on several occasions for communicating with the Court calling him "whining, " in light of his actions "taking off child safety tape, " stating "I haven't lost a psychological war in 25 years."
Sergeant Tumacder asked Plaintiff if he "liked boys, " and called him the "Black hand, " and stated that Plaintiff looked "Black, " but he is a ...