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.

Revis v. Salinas

United States District Court, E.D. California

October 15, 2014

ANDRE REVIS, Plaintiff,
v.
L. SALINAS, et al., Defendants.

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING DISMISSAL OF ACTION

DENNIS L. BECK, Magistrate Judge.

Plaintiff Andre Revis ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action. Plaintiff filed his complaint in the Fresno County Superior Court on July 7, 2012. Defendants L. Salinas, J. Wang, A. Enenmoh, E. Clark and J. Moon were served with the complaint on December 13, 2012. On January 11, 2013, Defendants[1] removed the action to this Court. Defendants paid the filing fee upon removal.

On September 6, 2013, the Court screened Plaintiff's complaint and dismissed it with leave to amend.

Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint on September 30, 2013, but it was almost an exact copy of his original complaint. As a result, the Court dismissed it with leave to amend on March 14, 2014.

Plaintiff filed his Second Amended Complaint on March 31, 2014.

A. SCREENING REQUIREMENT

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).

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 , 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009) (citing Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly , 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)). Plaintiff must set forth "sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim that is plausible on its face.'" Id . (quoting Twombly , 550 U.S. at 555). While factual allegations are accepted as true, legal conclusions are not. Id.

Section 1983 provides a cause of action for the violation of Plaintiff's constitutional or other federal rights by persons acting under color of state law. Nurre v. Whitehead , 580 F.3d 1087, 1092 (9th Cir 2009); Long v. County of Los Angeles , 442 F.3d 1178, 1185 (9th Cir. 2006); Jones v. Williams , 297 F.3d 930, 934 (9th Cir. 2002). Plaintiff's allegations must link the actions or omissions of each named defendant to a violation of his rights; there is no respondeat superior liability under section 1983. Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 676-77; Simmons v. Navajo County, Ariz. , 609 F.3d 1011, 1020-21 (9th Cir. 2010); Ewing v. City of Stockton , 588 F.3d 1218, 1235 (9th Cir. 2009); Jones , 297 F.3d at 934. Plaintiff must present factual allegations sufficient to state a plausible claim for relief. Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678-79; Moss v. U.S. Secret Service , 572 F.3d 962, 969 (9th Cir. 2009). The mere possibility of misconduct falls short of meeting this plausibility standard. Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678; Moss , 572 F.3d at 969.

B. SUMMARY OF PLAINTIFF'S ALLEGATIONS[2]

Plaintiff is currently incarcerated at the California Substance Abuse Treatment Facility ("CSATF") in Corcoran, California.

Plaintiff alleges that on November 20, 2007, he was transferred to CSATF from High Desert State Prison without a substantial portion of his medical file. During Plaintiff's first consultation with Defendant Enenmoh, Plaintiff disclosed his entire prison medical history. Defendant Enenmoh failed to follow-up on reviewing his health care records, which resulted in Plaintiff not "receiving a number of critical life altering medication(s)" and not receiving treatment under plans that were in place from his prior doctors. ECF No. 12, at 8. This caused Plaintiff severe, excruciating and debilitating pain. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Enenmoh left him to suffer "in anxiety and under duress" without providing the requested level of "aftercare" documented in Plaintiff's health records from High Desert State Prison.

On November 21, 2008, Plaintiff was transferred to Corcoran State Prison. Defendant Moon was the prison yard physician. Defendant Moon reviewed Plaintiff's health care records, and Plaintiff contends that after numerous consultations and complaints about pain, he filed a medical grievance seeking treatment for his shoulder and low back pain. X-rays and MRIs were ordered, and Plaintiff awaited the decision in pain.

On January 15, 2009, Defendant Wang denied Defendant Moon's request for services.

Plaintiff sought a medical transfer hold so that he could receive treatment scheduled for April 8, 2009. On January 27, 2009, Defendant Salinas denied the request and Plaintiff was subsequently transferred to another facility.

Plaintiff saw Defendant Mendler on May 15, 2009. On May 18, 2009, arthroscopy of the right shoulder was approved.

On June 2, 2009, Defendant Salinas contacted Plaintiff and the receiving institution regarding his health care appeal. He advised Plaintiff to seek further treatment with the prison yard physician at Calipatria State Prison. Plaintiff expressed his disappointment with having to suffer in pain while being made to repeat the consultation phase over and over.

On June 3, 2009, Defendant Lai said that the arthroscopic surgery had been performed and this information was conveyed to Defendant Salinas. Plaintiff contends that this was "fraudulently" entered into Plaintiff's medical records by Defendant Mendler, in collaboration with Defendant Lai.[3] Plaintiff states that he never underwent a procedure on June 3, 2009.

On June 18, 2009, Plaintiff was transferred back to Corcoran State Prison without knowledge of the prior "fraudulent" activity at Calipatria. Upon arrival, Plaintiff immediately submitted a health care service request. He saw Defendant Moon on July 1, 2009, and sought medical treatment for the excruciating and debilitating pain in his shoulders. Defendant Moon referred to ...


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.