United States District Court, E.D. California
ALLISON CLAIRE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
is an inmate at Deuel Vocational Institution under the
authority of the California Department of Corrections and
Rehabilitation (CDCR), proceeding pro se with a civil rights
complaint filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and a
request to proceed in forma pauperis filed pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1915. Plaintiff challenges conditions of his
prior confinement at the Yuba County Main Jail. This action
is referred to the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule
302(c). For the following reasons, the court grants
plaintiff's request to proceed in forma pauperis but
finds that the complaint does not state a claim upon which
relief may be granted. Plaintiff will be granted leave to
In Forma Pauperis Application
has submitted an affidavit and prison trust account statement
that make the showing required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a).
See ECF Nos. 4, 6. Accordingly, plaintiff's
request to proceed in forma pauperis will be granted.
must still pay the statutory filing fee of $350.00 for this
action over time. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914(a), 1915(b)(1).
By this order, plaintiff will be assessed an initial partial
filing fee in accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(b)(1). By separate order, the court will direct
the appropriate agency to collect the initial partial filing
fee from plaintiff's trust account and forward it to the
Clerk of the Court. Thereafter, plaintiff will be obligated
to make monthly payments of twenty percent of the preceding
month's income credited to plaintiff's trust account.
These payments will be forwarded by the appropriate agency to
the Clerk of the Court each time the amount in
plaintiff's account exceeds $10.00, until the filing fee
is paid in full. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2).
Screening of Plaintiff's Civil Rights Complaint
court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners
seeking relief against a governmental entity or officer or
employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a).
The court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if the
prisoner has raised claims that are legally “frivolous
or malicious, ” that fail to state a claim upon which
relief may be granted, or that seek monetary relief from a
defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. §
1915A(b)(1), (2). A claim is legally frivolous when it lacks
an arguable basis either in law or in fact. Neitzke v.
Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989); Franklin v.
Murphy, 745 F.2d 1221, 1227-28 (9th Cir. 1984).
district court must construe a pro se pleading liberally to
determine if it states a potentially cognizable claim. While
detailed factual allegations are not required,
“[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 Corporation v. Twombly,
550 U.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.'” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678 (quoting
Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570).
se litigant is entitled to notice of the deficiencies in the
complaint and an opportunity to amend, unless the
complaint's deficiencies cannot be cured by amendment.
See Noll v. Carlson, 809 F.2d 1446, 1448 (9th Cir.
1987); see also Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122,
1130-31 (9th Cir. 2000).
was booked into the Yuba County Main Jail on July 3, 2019,
ECF No. 1 at 4, where he was allegedly denied items required
to practice his Muslim faith. Plaintiff alleges that he spoke
with “multiple deputies” who directed him to the
inmate request form procedures, but his “two emergency
requests” were not answered. Id. at 1. He
submitted a grievance form on July 15, 2019 “to be
given partial items . . . such as Quran & prayer rug. A
Jewish Kosher diet was given. I needed Halal diet.”
Id. at 2. “Sergeant Cordray was the supervisor
who provided partial items” on July 16, 2019.
Id. at 3. Plaintiff describes Cordray as a Jail
Shift Supervisor and names him as a defendant in this action.
Id. at 2.
July 16, 2019, plaintiff alleges that defendant Captain A.
Garza, the Jail Commander, “denied [plaintiff] verbally
the right to fully exercise my right to freedom of religion
by denying Juma'h (Muslim) Services along with prayer
beads, prayer oil, cufi (head cover) and EID (special prayer
in Juma'h).” Id. at 3. Garza allegedly
told plaintiff that “such events, items and
people” presented security risks to the facility and he
“refused to comment on paper.” Id. at
2-3. Plaintiff alleges that Garza's response
“caused [him] mental & emotional suffering by not
being allowed to prayer & pushing me away from religion
while providing other religious ...