Arocha v. CDCR

Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 RUDY AROCHA, 7 Case No. 23-cv-01733-RS (PR) Plaintiff, 8 9 Vv. ORDER OF DISMISSAL CDCR, et al., 10 Defendants. 1] g 12

13 INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff's second amended 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint is before the Court for

15 || review pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). This federal civil rights action is DISMISSED A 16 || (without prejudice) because plaintiff has failed to state a claim for relief and comply with

= 17 || federal pleading rules in any of his three complaints. Because this dismissal is without 18 prejudice, plaintiff may move to reopen. Any such motion must be accompanied with an 19 || amended complaint that complies with federal pleading rules and states a claim for relief. 20 DISCUSSION 21 |] A. Standard of Review 22 A federal court must conduct a preliminary screening in any case in which a 23 || prisoner seeks redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a 24 || governmental entity. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). In its review, a court must identify any 25 || cognizable claims and dismiss any claims that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim 26 || upon which relief may be granted or seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune 27 || from such relief. See id. § 1915A(b)(1), (2). Pro se pleadings must be liberally construed. 28 || See Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep’t, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1988).

1 A “complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a 2 || claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) 3 || (quoting Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). “A claim has facial 4 || plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the 5 || reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.” /d. (quoting 6 || Twombly, 550 U.S. at 556). Furthermore, a court “is not required to accept legal 7 || conclusions cast in the form of factual allegations if those conclusions cannot reasonably 8 || be drawn from the facts alleged.” Clegg v. Cult Awareness Network, 18 F.3d 752, 754-55 9 || (9th Cir. 1994). To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two 10 || essential elements: (1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States 11 || was violated, and (2) that the alleged violation was committed by a person acting under the 12 || color of state law. See West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988). 13 || B. Legal Claims S 14 Plaintiff's original complaint was dismissed with leave to amend. He made 3 15 || conclusory allegations against supervisory defendants; raised unrelated claims against 16 || persons at several prisons (some which were outside the Northern District); and his claims 17 || were confusing. (Dkt. No. 7 at 2-3.) His first amended complaint was dismissed with 18 |] leave to amend because it was prolix at 61 pages, confusing, and raised unrelated claims, 19 || thereby violating federal pleading rules. (Dkt. No. 17 at 2-3.) 20 Plaintiff's second amended complaint fails to state a claim for relief. He alleges in 21 || aconclusory fashion that from 2006 to 2024 various CDCR employees at various prisons 22 || recorded plaintiff engaging in non-consensual sexual activity and at another time being 23 || strip-searched, and then proceeded to share these images and recordings with other 24 || employees. (Second Am. Compl., Dkt. No. 18 at 5-6, 7-8.) He alleges that this has led to 25 || harassment and abuse; voyeurism; labelling him as a gay inmate, a rapist, a child molester 26 || and a sex offender; and attempts to extort, harass, and blackmail his family. (/d. at 5-9, 27 || 11.) His allegations are conclusory in that he simply lists employees and states they are 28 ORDER OF DISMISSAL CASE No. 23-cv-01733-RS

1 responsible for the production and distribution of the images and recordings. His 2 allegations of harassment and abuse lack specifics and are largely conclusory. He does not 3 describe any specific instances of voyeurism or how plaintiff knew that employees were 4 distributing images or how he knows they were inviting others to view the recordings and 5 images. Also, because he alleges that these acts occurred over many years and at different 6 prisons (some outside the Northern District), it is difficult, if not impossible, to tell who 7 committed what wrong and where. 8 Plaintiff has had three attempts at trying to state a claim for relief and to comply 9 with federal pleading rules and has not been successful. Accordingly, this federal civil 10 rights action will be dismissed without prejudice to plaintiff filing an amended complaint 11 that corrects these deficiencies. 12 CONCLUSION 13 This federal civil rights action is DISMISSED without prejudice to plaintiff filing 14 an amended complaint that states a claim for relief and complies with federal pleading 15 rules. Because this dismissal is without prejudice, plaintiff may move to reopen. Any 16 such motion must (1) have the words MOTION TO REOPEN written on the first page; 17 and (2) be accompanied by an amended complaint in which plaintiff pleads factual content 18 that allows the Court to draw the reasonable inference that each defendant is liable for the 19 misconduct alleged. The Clerk shall enter judgment in favor of defendants, and close the 20 file. 21 IT IS SO ORDERED. 22 Dated: October ___, 2024 _________________________ 23 RICHARD SEEBORG 24 Chief United States District Judge 25