United States District Court, E.D. California
ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO AMEND FOR
FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM (ECF No. 1)
Debby Genthner is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in
this action. Currently before the Court is Plaintiff's
complaint, filed March 1, 2017. (ECF No. 1.)
district court must perform a preliminary screening and must
dismiss a case if at any time the Court determines that the
complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be
granted. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2); see Lopez v.
Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1129 (9th Cir. 2000) (section
1915(e) applies to all in forma pauperis complaints, not just
those filed by prisoners). In determining whether a complaint
fails to state a claim, the Court uses the same pleading
standard used under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a). A
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 (2009) (citing Bell
Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)).
reviewing the pro se complaint, the court is to liberally
construe the pleadings and accept as true all factual
allegations contained in the complaint. Erickson v.
Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007). Although a court must
accept as true all factual allegations contained in a
complaint, a court need not accept a plaintiff's legal
conclusions as true. Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678.
“[A] complaint [that] pleads facts that are
‘merely consistent with' a defendant's
liability . . . ‘stops short of the line between
possibility and plausibility of entitlement to
relief.'” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678 (quoting
Twombly, 550 U.S. at 557). Therefore, the complaint
must contain sufficient factual content for the court to draw
the reasonable conclusion that the defendant is liable for
the misconduct alleged. Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678.
February 29, 2016, Plaintiff went to the Surgical Services
Clinic for a left ankle injury. (Compl. at 7,  ECF No. 1.) Dr.
Okoro told Plaintiff that she and Dr. Fariborz Naeni looked
at the x-rays that were taken of Plaintiff's left ankle
that day and that Dr. Naeni would come see Plaintiff. (Compl.
at 5, 7.) Plaintiff claims that Dr. Naeni did not go to
Plaintiff's room to examine her and Dr. Okoro did not
examine her foot and barely touched her ankle. (Compl. at 7.)
Dr. Okoro told Plaintiff that “everything was fine with
[her] x-rays.” (Compl. at 8.) Dr. Okoro told Plaintiff
that her “left foot had no other breaks or trauma and
it was okay to continue to walk on [her] left foot.”
(Compl. at 7.) Dr. Okoro said it was a sprain and to stay off
of it for a while if it hurt, but that it was okay to walk on
it, and even power walk on it. (Compl. at 8.)
26, 2016, Plaintiff went to the emergency room at Community
Regional Medical Center (“CRMC”). (Compl. at 7.)
Plaintiff alleges that her ankle was re-injured, looked
bruised again, was really swollen, and she had a hard time
walking on it. (Compl. at 9.) Plaintiff claims that she
waited over ten hours to see a doctor and have x-rays taken.
(Id.) Plaintiff claims that Dr. Yolanda Moore looked
at the February 29, 2016 and May 29, 2016 x-rays and then
talked to Plaintiff in the hallway. (Id.) Plaintiff
alleges that Dr. Yolanda Moore told her that she could see a
prior fracture, which healed, and some fragmented bones in
her left ankle on the February 29, 2016 x-rays. (Compl. at 7,
9.) Plaintiff contends that the doctors who looked at her
x-rays on May 29, 2016, did not note her avulsion fracture,
that her ankle was “really swollen, ” and that
she could barely walk. (Compl. at 9.) Plaintiff begged Dr.
Moore for a referral to an orthopedic specialist because Dr.
Luong, her doctor, would not give her one, but Dr. Moore said
she could not give her one because it was an old injury.
(Compl. at 9, 10.) Dr. Moore gave Plaintiff a flat foot
support and told Plaintiff to go to her doctor for a
referral. (Compl. at 9.)
September 20, 2016, Plaintiff was seen by Dr. Douglas M.
Bluth, who told Plaintiff that she had an avulsion fracture
in her left ankle. (Compl. at 7.) Plaintiff wore a boot for
over a month and her ankle started to feel better. (Compl. at
8.) She wears a brace for her left ankle daily.
(Id.) She still has pain and does not think it
healed properly, but she has not had any follow-up care.
(Compl. at 8-9.) She thinks she should have another x-ray and
a consultation with an orthopedic doctor to see if it healed
properly and if there is permanent damage. (Compl. at 9.)
claims that she suffered emotional distress because Dr. Naeni
and Dr. Okoro did not diagnose and treat her for the avulsion
fracture in her left ankle on February 29, 2016, at the
Surgical Services Clinic, and Dr. Moore, Dr. Chinnock, and
other doctors did not do so on May 26, 2016, at CRMC. (Compl.
at 7, 8, 11.) Plaintiff alleges that she walked around in
pain for over eight months with no diagnosis or treatment for
her ankle fracture. (Compl. at 8, 11.) She alleges that she
“woke up with [her] left ankle bruised with swelling
and a lot of pain.” (Compl. at 8.) She claims that Dr.
Moore, Dr. Brian Chinnock, and others at CRMC did not
diagnose new fractures, swelling, and bruising on May 26,
2016. (Compl. at 9, 10.) She claims that she should have seen
an orthopedic doctor and been fitted with a boot at CRMC and
had a follow-up appointment scheduled with an orthopedic
doctor. (Compl. at 10.)
brings this action against CRMC, Surgical Services Clinic,
Dr. Naeni, Dr.
and Dr. Chinnock alleging federal-question jurisdiction
because of respondeat superior, vicarious liability, doctrine
of corporate negligence, hospital corporate liability, and
California Penal Code §§11160 and 11161. (Compl. at
brings a claim under California Penal Code §§
11160(a)(2) and (b) and 11161 for Dr. Naeni and Dr.
Okoro's failure to report her left ankle avulsion
fracture to authorities on February 29, 2016, and for Dr.
Moore, Dr. Chinnock, and other involved doctors' failure
to report her left ankle avulsion fracture to authorities on
May 26, 2016. (Compl. at 8, 10, 14.) Plaintiff alleges that
she has “continued to suffer from repeated injuries by
this perpetrator or perpetrators because Dr. Fariborz Naeni
and Dr. Okoro did not report these injuries to law
enforcement authorities.” (Compl. at 8.) Plaintiff also
alleges that she has “continued to suffer from repeated
injuries by this perpetrator or perpetrators because Dr.
Yolanda Moore and Dr. Brian Chinnock did not report these
injuries to law enforcement.” (Compl. at 10-11.)
seeks compensatory damages and punitive damages. (Compl. at
14.) She also asks the Court to hold Defendants accountable
and criminally charge them. (Compl. at 6, 13.) She states
that the doctors named in this complaint should have their
licenses revoked. (Compl. at 13.) She alleges intentional