United States District Court, N.D. California
ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH LEAVE TO AMEND
JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
an inmate at the California Treatment Facility
(“CTF”) in Soledad, California, filed this pro se
civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. §1983 against the
California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation
(“CDCR”), the California Correctional Health Care
Services (“CCHCS”), and two CTF doctors, Dr.
Ahmed and Dr. Tarrar. Plaintiff’s application to proceed
in forma pauperis is granted in a separate order.
For the reasons explained below, the complaint is dismissed
with leave to amend.
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). The Court must identify cognizable claims or
dismiss the complaint, or any portion of the complaint, if
the complaint “is frivolous, malicious, or fails to
state a claim upon which relief may be granted, ” or
“seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune
from such relief.” Id. § 1915A(b). Pro se
pleadings must be liberally construed. Balistreri v.
Pacifica Police Dep't, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir.
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 to state a
claim a complaint “does not need detailed factual
allegations, . . . a plaintiff's 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.
state a claim under 42 U.S.C. §1983, a plaintiff must
allege two elements: (1) that a right secured by the
Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and
(2) that the alleged violation was committed by a person
acting under the color of state law. West v. Atkins,
487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988).
alleges that he suffers from Hepatitis C, and that his
condition has progressed since April 2015 from stage 2
cirrhosis of the liver to stage 4. He would like to be
treated with a medication called Harvoni. He claims that he
has not received proper medical attention at CTF. He attaches
a number of documents to his complaint, including medical
records, a letter to Judge Henderson, and his handwritten
the deprivation of medical care violates the Eighth Amendment
if prison officials were deliberately indifferent to an
inmate’s serious medical needs, see Estelle v.
Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 104 (1976), Plaintiff does not
allege how the different Defendants were involved in
depriving him of adequate medical care. Liability may be
imposed on Defendants only if Plaintiff shows that their
actions actually and proximately caused the deprivation of
his federally protected rights.
Lemire v. Cal. Dept. of Corrections &
Rehabilitation, 726 F.3d 1062, 1085 (9th Cir. 2013).
Plaintiff’s conclusory allegations that Defendants
failed to provide him with “proper” medical care
are too general to satisfy the pleading requirement set forth
in Twombly that he must make sufficient factual
allegations to state a plausible claim for relief against
each of the named Defendants. Simply attaching a packet of
unlabeled medical records, notes and correspondence without
explaining how those documents show that each Defendant
caused him to receive inadequate care also does not suffice.
To state a claim upon which relief may be granted, Plaintiff
must allege in a coherent and understandable manner the
actions and omissions of each Defendant --- with approximate
dates --- that amounted to deliberate indifference to his
Hepatitis C and cirrhosis. Plaintiff is given the opportunity
to make these allegations in an amended complaint, which he
must file in accordance with the instructions below.
complaint is dismissed with leave to amend. Plaintiff shall
file an amended complaint within twenty eight (28) days from
the date this order is filed. The amended complaint must
include the caption and civil case number used in this order
(No. C 16-2876 JSC (PR)) and the words “COURT-ORDERED
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT” on the first page. Because an
amended complaint completely replaces the original complaint,
see Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1262 (9th
Cir. 1992), Plaintiff may not incorporate material from the
original by reference; he must include in his amended
complaint all the claims he wishes to pursue. Failure to
amend within the designated time and in accordance with this
order will result in the dismissal of this action.
is Plaintiffs responsibility to prosecute this case.
Plaintiff must keep the Court informed of any change of
address by filing a separate paper with the clerk headed
“Notice of Change of Address.” He also must
comply with the Court's orders in a timely fashion,
although he may request an extension of time provided it is
accompanied by a showing of good cause and it is filed on or
before the deadline he wants to extend. Failure to ...