Khan v. Presley

Summary

The United States District Court for the Northern District of California grants Muhammad Khan’s motion for an extension of time and grants leave to proceed in forma pauperis. The court dismisses with prejudice the retaliation, due process, and excessive-force claims, while dismissing with leave to amend an Eighth Amendment claim concerning alleged deprivation of sitting and restroom access in a holding cell. The court directs Khan to file a second amended complaint within twenty-eight days.

Holdings

1. The amended complaint failed to state a First Amendment retaliation claim because it did not adequately allege that the challenged actions were taken because of protected conduct, that the actions chilled Plaintiff's First Amendment activity, and that the actions did not reasonably advance a legitimate correctional goal.
2. The amended complaint did not yet state an Eighth Amendment claim because Plaintiff failed to allege the duration of the deprivation or identify the responsible defendant, but Plaintiff was granted leave to amend this claim.
3. The amended complaint failed to state a due process claim based on the administrative-segregation retention hearing because Plaintiff was not constitutionally entitled to witnesses or documentary evidence and failed to allege that the hearing officer was not impartial.
4. The amended complaint failed to state an excessive-force claim against Defendant Presley because it did not provide sufficient facts showing that the force was used maliciously and sadistically to cause harm rather than in a good-faith effort to maintain or restore discipline.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the amended complaint adequately stated a First Amendment retaliation claim.
2. Whether the allegation that Plaintiff was denied sitting and restroom access in a holding cell adequately stated an Eighth Amendment claim.
3. Whether the alleged procedures at Plaintiff's administrative-segregation retention hearing stated a due process claim.
4. Whether Plaintiff adequately stated an Eighth Amendment excessive-force claim against Defendant Presley.
5. Whether Plaintiff should receive another opportunity to amend the retaliation, due process, and excessive-force claims.

Disposition

other