United States District Court, E.D. California
ROBERT R. RECINO, Plaintiff,
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING DISMISSAL OF
CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS
BARBARA A. MCAULIFFE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
Robert R. Recino (“Plaintiff”) is a state
prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this
civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
Plaintiff originally filed this matter in the U.S. District
Court for the Central District of California, and it was
transferred to this Court on March 6, 2015. Plaintiff’s
third amended complaint, dated July 12, 2016, is currently
before the Court for screening.
Screening Requirement and Standard
Court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners
seeking relief against a governmental entity and/or against
an officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915A(a). Plaintiff’s complaint, or any portion
thereof, is subject to dismissal if it is frivolous or
malicious, if it fails to state a claim upon which relief may
be granted, or if it seeks monetary relief from a defendant
who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. §
1915(A)(b)(1), (2); 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).
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, 556 U.S. 662, 678, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009)
(citing Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S.
544, 555, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 1964-65 (2007)). While a
plaintiff’s allegations are taken as true, courts
“are not required to indulge unwarranted
inferences.” Doe I v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.,
572 F.3d 677, 681 (9th Cir. 2009) (internal quotation marks
and citation omitted).
survive screening, Plaintiff’s claims must be facially
plausible, which requires sufficient factual detail to allow
the Court to reasonably infer that each named defendant is
liable for the misconduct alleged. Iqbal, 556 U.S.
at 678, 129 S.Ct. at 1949 (quotation marks omitted); Moss
v. United States Secret Service, 572 F.3d 962, 969 (9th
Cir. 2009). The sheer possibility that a defendant acted
unlawfully is not sufficient, and mere consistency with
liability falls short of satisfying the plausibility
standard. Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678, 129 S.Ct. at 1949
(quotation marks omitted); Moss, 572 F.3d at 969.
Courts are required to liberally construe pro se prisoner
complaints. Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 106, 97
S.Ct. 285, 292 (1976).
is currently housed at R.J. Donovan Correctional Facility in
San Diego, California. Plaintiff states that the relevant
events at issues occurred while he was incarcerated at
Corcoran State Prison (“Corcoran”) in Corcoran,
California, and at R.J. Donovan Correctional Facility
(“R.J. Donovan”) in San Diego, California, after
he was transferred.
complaint asserts a claim against two Unknown Correctional
Officers, employed at Corcoran; Dr. Jeffrey Neubarth, a
doctor employed at Corcoran; Dr. Shyam Nair, a doctor
employed at Corcoran; Dr. Klarich, at doctor employed at
Corcoran Memorial Hospital; and Dr. Frederick Howden, a
doctor employed at R.J. Donovan.
alleges: While he was at Corcoran, two or three inmates
somehow discovered that he was convicted in a sexually
sensitive case, and they attacked him. Two unknown
correctional officers witnessed the attack by the other
inmates, but failed to stop it; they stood by and watched,
and did nothing until after the unnamed inmates were through
with Plaintiff. The two or three inmates’ names were
never disclosed, and the two unknown officers’ names
were also never disclosed. The two unknown correctional
officers thereafter left Plaintiff without medical attention
for a very long period of time, but eventually took Plaintiff
to the prison infirmary.
result of the beatings, Plaintiff suffered considerable brain
damage, and continues to suffer brain damage, resulting in
numerous strokes, paralyzing his left side facial muscles,
and restricting his speech, causing him to suffer slurred
speech. Plaintiff’s back injuries continue to worsen
over time, and he may eventually have to use a wheelchair for
Neubarth, Nair, and Klarich all failed to properly diagnose
Plaintiff, which gave cause for his medical condition to
worsen, eventually having strokes, which paralyzed his left
side. Plaintiff’s prison medical records reflect all
infirmities, including injuries sustained during the attack.
Plaintiff submitted his records with his original complaint,
but is unable to secure more copies within any six (6) to
twelve (12) month period.
alleges Eighth Amendment violations against the two unnamed
correctional officers, and deliberate indifference to serious
medical needs against the physician defendants that treated
him at Corcoran and R.J. Donovan after he was transferred.