United States District Court, N.D. California, San Francisco Division
ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH LEAVE TO AMEND [Re: ECF Nos. 1, 6]
LAUREL BEELER, Magistrate Judge.
Timothy Fear, a prisoner currently incarcerated at the Correctional Training Facility - Soledad, filed this pro se prisoner's civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. His complaint and amended complaint are now before the court for review under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. This order dismisses the complaint and amended complaint, and requires Mr. Fear to file a second amended complaint.
I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Plaintiff filed a complaint on December 16, 2014, and an amended complaint three days later. ( See ECF Nos. 1 and 6.) Less than two weeks later, he filed a notice stating that he intended to "file a typed updated complaint with this court if possible next week." (ECF No. 7.) The court then issued an order stating that, "n light of Mr. Fear's intent to file a second amended complaint, the court will wait for that pleading to be filed (or until twenty days from the date of this order, whichever occurs first) before doing the initial review." (ECF No. 10 at 1.) Thereafter, Mr. Fear requested and received two extensions of the deadline to file a second amended complaint, eventually making the second amended complaint due on April 24, 2015. ( See ECF Nos. 17 and 20.) Mr. Fear never filed the second amended complaint. The court therefore will now review the pleadings on file.
Mr. Fear's amended complaint is unsigned and presents a very abbreviated version of the allegations. (ECF No. 6.) An unsigned pleading may be stricken if the omission is not promptly corrected after being called to the party's attention. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 11(a). There is no reason to require Mr. Fear to submit a signed copy of the amended complaint because it has even more deficiencies than the original complaint and also necessitates a second amended complaint. Whereas the original complaint had a 4-page attachment describing his claims, that attachment was not included with the unsigned amended complaint, which included only a half-page summary of part of his claims. Therefore, the court dismisses the amended complaint due to the failure to sign it and will treat the original complaint as the operative pleading. The original complaint will be reviewed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.
II. ALLEGATIONS OF COMPLAINT
The complaint alleges the following about events and omissions at San Quentin State Prison:
Mr. Fear filed a complaint with Internal Affairs on or about May 2, 2014. (ECF No. 1 at 5.)
On or after May 2, 2014, Mr. Fear gave an unidentified prison counselor some documents for photocopying to use as court exhibits. ( Id. at 9.) The documents detailed Mr. Fear's cooperation with the San Diego Police Homicide Division. The "documents made their way into the possession of inmates Deragon and Spraeka who showed them to all the white relevant inmates." ( Id. )
On May 3, 2014, Mr. Fear was told by inmate Deragon, a leader of "the white inmates, " to "roll it up' or else. (Roll it up' means to go into protective custody.)" ( Id. at 5.) It is Mr. Fear's "allegation and claim that inmate Deragon was ordered by correctional officer Plagman... to bully and harass" him. ( Id. ) Since that day, Mr. Fear has been the victim of "countless" incidents of harassment and assaults. ( Id. )
On May 25, 2014, inmate Spraeka told Mr. Fear to check into protective custody, but backed off when "he realized he had miscalculated his abilities to intimidate" Mr. Fear. ( Id. ) Inmates Spraeka and Deragon have shown Mr. Fear's confidential paperwork to "all the relevant white inmates, especially those who work in Prison Industries." ( Id. at 7.) (Mr. Fear states that the confidential paperwork is listed in Exhibit D, but there is no Exhibit D to his complaint.)
On May 26, 2014, inmate Spraeka told Mr. Fear that Mr. Fear was infected with HIV. Mr. Fear "highly doubt[s] this statement ...