Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Fields v. Beard

United States District Court, E.D. California

April 6, 2017

KEVIN FIELDS, Plaintiff,
v.
JEFFREY BEARD, et al., Defendants.

          ORDER DISMISSING FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM, WITH LEAVE TO AMEND (ECF No. 33.) THIRTY DAY DEADLINE TO FILE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT ORDER FOR CLERK TO SEND PLAINTIFF A CIVIL RIGHTS COMPLAINT FORM.

          GARY S. AUSTIN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.

         I. BACKGROUND

         Kevin Fields (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On November 5, 2014, Plaintiff filed the Complaint commencing this action in the Sacramento Division of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. (ECF No. 1.) On April 30, 2015, the case was transferred to the Fresno Division of the Eastern District of California. (ECF No. 6.)

         On February 24, 2016, the court dismissed the Complaint for failure to state a claim, with leave to amend. (ECF No. 22.) On June 27, 2016, Plaintiff filed the First Amended Complaint, which is now before the court for screening. (ECF No. 33.)

         II. SCREENING REQUIREMENT

         The in forma pauperis statute provides that “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. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). “Rule 8(a)'s simplified pleading standard applies to all civil actions, with limited exceptions, ” none of which applies to section 1983 actions. Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A., 534 U.S. 506, 512 (2002); Fed.R.Civ.P. 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). “Such a statement must simply give the defendant fair notice of what the plaintiff's claim is and the grounds upon which it rests.” Swierkiewicz, 534 U.S. at 512. 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 (2007)), and 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). While factual allegations are accepted as true, legal conclusions are not. Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678. However, “the liberal pleading standard . . . applies only to a plaintiff's factual allegations.” Neitze v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 330 n.9 (1989). “[A] liberal interpretation of a civil rights complaint may not supply essential elements of the claim that were not initially pled.” Bruns v. Nat'l Credit Union Admin., 122 F.3d 1251, 1257 (9th Cir. 1997) (quoting Ivey v. Bd. of Regents, 673 F.2d 266, 268 (9th Cir. 1982)).

         III. SUMMARY OF FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

         Plaintiff is presently incarcerated at Corcoran State Prison (CSP) in Corcoran, California, where the events at issue occurred. Plaintiff names the following 50 individuals as Defendants: Jeffrey Beard, D. Daveys, Connie Gipson, R. K. Swift, T. Perez, M. Sexton, M. Jennings, J. C. Smith, R. S. Lambert, S. Johnson, M. Junious, R. Broomfield, C. Moreno, C. Rodriguez, S. C. Rousseau, C. Munoz, J. Callow, A. De La Cruz, A. Valdez, A. De Los Santos, A. Gonzales, R. Vogel, A. Perez, D. B. Hernandez, E. Molina, S. Leon, A. Peterson, D. Case, M. Calhoun, D. Madsen, M. Mason, M. Cuevas, V. Montoya, J. Padanos, P. Davis, N. Diaz, A. Pacillas, D. Goree, M. Oliveira, Mary Kimbrell, Karen Cribbs, Teresa Macias, Jeffrey Wang, Olga Beregovskaya, Edgar Clark, Julian Kim, Jong Moon, Ravijot Gill, P. Rouch, and M. Mays (collectively, “Defendants”).

         Plaintiff's allegations follow:

         CSP is located in a hyper-endemic region for Coccidioidomycosis (Cocci), a fungus which causes the disease known as Valley Fever. African-Americans, Filipinos, people with weak immune systems, such as those with an organ transplant or who have HIV/AIDS, and those with chronic illnesses such as Diabetes and chronic lung disease requiring oxygen, are at increased risk of developing severe disease. Individuals with a prior history of Cocci are immune to subsequent infection.

         Plaintiff is an African-American man who has never contracted Valley Fever and is at an increased risk of extrapulmonary [sic] complications caused by Valley Fever. Plaintiff has been diagnosed with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, asthma, uncontrolled hypertension, and a degenerative bulging disc in his neck and back, resulting in chronic pain. Plaintiff requested to be transferred to California State Prison-Sacramento, which is located in a non-hyper-endemic region for Valley Fever.

         On July 10, 2013 and September 17, 2013, Plaintiff sent letters to Defendant Jeffrey Beard, informing him that Plaintiff is an African-American prisoner, apprising him of Plaintiff's medical maladies, and requesting to be transferred out of the hyper-endemic region. Defendant Beard refused and/or failed to respond to the letters.

         On July 10, 2013, Plaintiff also sent letters or Inmate Request for Interview forms to these 27 Defendants: Connie Gipson, R. K. Swift, M. Sexton, M. Jennings, J. C. Smith, R. S. Lambert, S. Johnson, M. Junious, C. Moreno, C. Rodriguez, S. C. Rousseau, J. Callow, R. Vogel, A. Peterson, M. Calhoun, D. Madsen, M. Mason, P. Davis, N. Diaz, Mary Kimbrell, Jeffrey Wang, Olga Beregovskaya, Edgar Clark, Julian Kim, Jong Moon, Ravijot Gill, and P. Rouch, informing them of the same facts and requesting to be referred to the Institutional Classification Committee (ICC) so he could be transferred. The Defendants ignored Plaintiff's written requests. Plaintiff subsequently informed these same 27 Defendants in person. They all refused to refer Plaintiff to the ICC.

         On October 15, 2013, Defendant Davis told Plaintiff that although Plaintiff is an African-American, he is properly housed at CSP.

         During consultations with eight of the Defendants who are medical personnel, these eight Defendants admitted that they know Plaintiff is at an increased risk for extrapulmonary complications, but they were instructed to classify him as medium-risk.

         On October 15, 2013, Plaintiff sent CDCR-22 Request for Interview forms to Defendants Jeffrey Wang, Olga Beregovskaya, Edgar Clark, Julian Kim, Jong Moon, Ravijot Gill, and P. Rouch, requesting to be taken back to the ICC for transfer, due to his serious medical conditions. Each of ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.