United States District Court, Northern District of California
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
William Alsup United States District Judge
This is a pro se criminal complaint filed by a California prisoner. For the reasons discussed below, the complaint is Dismissed.
A. Standard of Review
Federal courts must engage in a preliminary screening of cases in which prisoners seek redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. 1915A(a). In its review the court must identify any cognizable claims, and dismiss any claims which are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. Id. at 1915A(b)(l), (2).
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2) requires only "a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief." "Specific facts are not necessary; the statement need only '"give the defendant fair notice of what the ... . claim is and the grounds upon which it rests...... Erickson v. Pardus, 127 S.Ct. 2197, 2200 (2007) (citations omitted). Although in order to state a claim a complaint "does not need detailed factual allegations, ... a plaintiffs obligation to provide the 'grounds of his 'entitle[ment] to relief requires more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do. . . . Factual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level." Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 1964-65 (2007) (citations omitted). A complaint must proffer "enough facts to state a claim for relief that is plausible on its face." Id. at 1974. Pro se pleadings must be liberally construed. Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep't, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1990).
To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. 1983, a plaintiff must allege two essential elements: (1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and (2) that the violation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law. West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48(1988).
B. Legal Claims
Plaintiff has filed a criminal complaint seeking the arrest of officials at the California Supreme Court for obstructing justice and other violations of state law. A private party has no standing to prosecute a criminal action. Golden State Transit Corp. v. Los Angeles, 493 U.S. 103, 106 (1989). Whether to prosecute and what criminal charges to file or bring are decisions that generally rest in the prosecutor's, not the court's, discretion. United States v. Batchelder, 442 U.S. 114, 124(1979). Accordingly, plaintiff s criminal complaint will be dismissed. If plaintiff wishes to proceed with civil rights or other civil claims, he may do so in a civil complaint filed in a new case. The deficiency notice sent by the clerk directing him to file a civil complaint in this case (dkt. 2) will be vacated.
For the reasons set out above, this action is Dismissed. The deficiency notice directing plaintiff to file a complaint (dkt. 2) is Vacated.
The clerk shall enter judgment and ...