Summary
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California grants the plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis. The court dismisses the prisoner’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint for failing to state an Eighth Amendment failure-to-protect claim against Officer Johnson. The dismissal is with leave to amend within 30 days.
Holdings
- The complaint failed to state an Eighth Amendment failure-to-protect claim because its vague allegations did not show that Officer Johnson was deliberately indifferent to a substantial risk of serious harm.
- Plaintiff was granted leave to amend the complaint within thirty days, subject to the requirement that the amended complaint be complete, comply with applicable rules, and concern the same case rather than new unrelated claims.
Questions Presented
- Whether the complaint stated an Eighth Amendment failure-to-protect claim against Officer Johnson.
- Whether the complaint should be dismissed under the prisoner-screening requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.
- Whether plaintiff should be granted leave to amend.
Disposition
dismissed
Cases Cited (7)
- Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 834 (1994)(followed)
- Hearns v. Terhune, 413 F.3d 1036, 1040, 1042 (9th Cir. 2005)(followed)
- Berg v. Kincheloe, 794 F.2d 457, 459 (9th Cir. 1986)(followed)
- Williams v. Wood, 223 F. App'x 670, 671 (9th Cir. 2007)(followed)
- Weilburg v. Shapiro, 488 F.3d 1202, 1205 (9th Cir. 2007)(followed)
- George v. Smith, 507 F.3d 605, 607 (7th Cir. 2007)(followed)
- Loux v. Rhay, 375 F.2d 55, 57 (9th Cir. 1967)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…