United States District Court, C.D. California
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE
SUZANNE H. SEGAL, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
December 6, 2016, Plaintiff Hoy Chan
(“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro
se, filed a civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983 and the Americans with Disabilities Act
(“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. § 12131 et seq. (the
“Complaint”). (Dkt. No. 1).
mandates that the court screen, as soon as practicable,
“a complaint in a civil action in which a prisoner
seeks redress from a governmental entity or officer or
employee of a governmental entity.” 28 U.S.C. §
1915A(a). The court may dismiss such a complaint, or any
portion of it, before service of process if the court
concludes that the complaint (1) is frivolous or malicious,
(2) fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted,
or (3) seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune
from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). For the reasons
stated below, the Complaint is DISMISSED with leave to
OF THE COMPLAINT
names the following Chuckawalla Valley State Prison
(“CVSP”) employees as defendants in their
official and individual capacities: (1) physician's
assistant, Orry Marciano (“Marciano”); (2) Nurse
Beatres; (3) Correctional Officer Anderson
(“Anderson”); and (4) Correctional Officer
Calvillo (“Calvillo”) (collectively
“Defendants”). (Compl. at 3-4).
alleges that Marciano engaged in the “unauthorized
practice of medicine” by prescribing medication to
Plaintiff without being a “real doctor” or making
a diagnosis. (Id. at 3, 5). As a result of
Marciano's treatment, Plaintiff has become
“weak” and his “breathing problem”
has deteriorated. Nurse Anderson ignored Plaintiff's
medical “needs” and yelled at Plaintiff.
(Id. at 3).
allegedly made a work accommodation request to Anderson and
Calvillo in order to avoid working with chemicals because of
Plaintiff's respiratory disability. (Id. at 4).
Plaintiff informed Calvillo that he uses “a breathing
machine and the chemicals are killing me.”
(Id. at 4). Anderson and Cavillo did not follow the
“operational procedure” or restrict
Plaintiff's exposure to chemicals. (Id. at 4-5).
attached to the Complaint indicate that a physician's
assistant evaluated Plaintiff on October 18,
2016. (Id. at 7). The evaluation was conducted because
Plaintiff filed a work accommodation request. (Id.
at 3-5, 7, 12). After the evaluation, the physician's
assistant allegedly informed Plaintiff that he was not
disabled because his “activities of daily living”
were not limited. (Id. at 7).
claims that Defendants were deliberately indifferent to his
serious medical needs and denied Plaintiff's work
accommodation request in disregard of his respiratory
disability. (Id. at 3-6). Plaintiff seeks an
injunction requiring Defendants to provide the “right
medical care” and follow the “operational
procedure, ” and he requests that the Court
“investigate” the alleged “unconstitutional
medical care” at CVSP. (Id. at 6).