United States District Court, E.D. California
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING DISMISSAL OF
THIS ACTION (ECF No. 11)
BARBARA A. MCAULIFFE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Archie Cranford (“Plaintiff”) is a civil detainee
proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights
action. On December 16, 2016, the Court dismissed
Plaintiff's first amended complaint with leave to amend.
(ECF No. 10.) Plaintiff's second amended complaint, filed
on January 6, 2017, is currently before the Court for
screening pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. For the reasons
discussed below, the Court will recommend that this action be
dismissed for failure to state a claim, failure to comply
with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8 and failure to obey a
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. § 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, 173 L.Ed.2d 868 (2009) (citing Bell Atl. Corp. v.
Twombly, 550.S. 544, 555 (2007)). Plaintiff must set
forth “sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to
‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its
face.'” Id. (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at
570). While factual allegations are accepted as true, legal
conclusions are not. Id.
Allegations in Second Amended Complaint
names the following defendants: (1) Teressita Dirige; (2)
Kathleen O' Brian; (3) Pam Ahlin; (4) Jessica C.; (5) Kim
Wyatt; (6) Jessica Prown; (7) Samantha Perryman; (8) Stefeni
Vally; (9) Lora Celis; (10) Ruth Muthima; (11) Audry King;
(12) Earick James; and (13) Brandon Price.
alleges as follows:
Now comes plaintiff which staes that each defendant is sued
in there indivijual capacity and each acted on there owen
acord plaintiff was standing in the unit medichion line
whateing to receve his medichion when he as assalted by
several fellow patients the assalt lasted about one minent
the reason for the assalt was due to a complaint that
plaintiff filed all defendants was made awaire of the
assalting takeing place when the medichion room person
sounded an alarm yet the acalt continued at this point all
defendants where awaire of the event that was takeing place
and took no action to help the plaintiff it is all defendants
job to ateampt to help the plaintiff instud all stude and
watched the plaintiff bee assalted.
(ECF No. 11, p. 1) (unedited text).
Civil Rights Act under which this action was filed provides:
Every person who, under color of [state law] ... subjects, or
causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States ...
to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities
secured by the Constitution ... shall be liable to the party
injured in an action ...