United States District Court, E.D. California
ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO EITHER FILE SECOND
AMENDED COMPLAINT OR NOTIFY COURT OF WILLINGNESS TO PROCEED
ONLY ON COGNIZABLE CLAIM THIRTY-DAY DEADLINE
L. BECK UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
Vance Edward Johnson ("Plaintiff"), a state
prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this action on October 29,
2014. On August 4, 2015, the Court screened the complaint and
determined Plaintiff had failed to state a cognizable claim.
Plaintiff was granted an opportunity to file an amended
complaint. On August 21, 2015, Plaintiff filed a First
Amended Complaint. Plaintiff names Correctional Officer M.
Barajas as Defendant.
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. §
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.
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
ALLEGATIONS IN COMPLAINT
is currently housed at Pleasant Valley State Prison
("PVSP") in Coalinga, California, where the events
at issue occurred.
has a medical history of internal, irreparable, physical
injuries, with restricted movement. He is on restriction from
bending, twisting, and lifting anything over 20 pounds.
March 19, 2014, after returning from being out-to-court,
Plaintiff was placed in an orientation cell. Plaintiff was
assigned to Cell C5-131 by Defendant Barajas. The cell had no
electrical power. Plaintiff states the toilet requires
electrical power to flush. He was given a bucket to fill up
with water to flush it. Plaintiff states the weather
condition was hot and he was on heat medication. He could not
utilize his fan to keep cool.
alleges he continually asked Defendant Barajas for a cell
move to one of the other 34 empty cells which had electrical
power, but she just laughed and said, "No, I already put
in a work order to turn on the electric power to that
cell." According to the obtained work order, however,
Barajas never put in a work order like she said. Also, the
work order showed Plaintiff was without power for twelve days
from March 19, 2014, to April 2, 2014. Inmate porters were
sent to Barajas to ask for a cell move, but they said,
"She's not going to move you." While in
orientation, inmates do not receive yard or dayroom time, and
they receive cell feed. Plaintiff began to feel sick and
experienced difficulty breathing. As a result of being in a
cell without power, Plaintiff suffered from severe headaches,
involuntary muscle contractions, nausea, body aches,
dehydration, heat cramps, and weakness.
March 21, 2014, Defendant Barajas allowed a Hispanic/Mexican
inmate a convenience move from an operational cell to another
cell; however, Plaintiff's requested "emergency cell
move" was denied.
is seeking compensatory damages in the amount of $5, 000.00,
and punitive damages in the amount of $5, 000.00.