Briggs v. Addenton

Opinion

1 , 2 3 5 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 RONNIE BRIGGS, No. C 20-7165 WHA (PR) 8 Plaintiff, ORDER OF DISMISSAL; 9 GRANTING LEAVE TO PROCEED v. IN FORMA PAUPERIS 10 BRIAN ADDENTON; ARRON (ECF Nos 7, 8) 12 Defendants. / 13 14 Plaintiff filed this pro se civil rights case under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He also seeks leave to 15 proceed in forma pauperis. 16 Federal courts must engage in a preliminary screening of cases in which individuals 17 seeking to proceed in forma pauperis seek redress from a governmental entity or officer or 18 employee of a governmental entity and identify any cognizable claims, and dismiss any claims 19 which are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seek 20 monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. See 28 U.S.C. 1915(e). Pro 21 se pleadings must be liberally construed. Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep't, 901 F.2d 696, 699 22 (9th Cir. 1990). To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. 1983, a plaintiff must allege two essential 23 elements: (1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, 24 and (2) that the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under the color of state 25 law. See West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988). 26 As in his prior cases, plaintiff sets forth an incomprehensible narrative in his complaint 27 and alleges that police officers improperly confiscated his personal property. He has been 28 advised on many occasions that such allegations do not present a cognizable claim for relief 1 under Section 1983. See Parratt v. Taylor, 451 U.S. 527, 535-44 (1981); Barnett v. Centoni, 31 2 F.3d 813, 816-17 (9th Cir. 1994) (citing Cal. Gov't Code §§ 810-895). Because such 3 advisements have not stopped plaintiff from continuing to present the same non-cognizable 4 claims, offering him the opportunity to file an amended complaint would be futile. 5 Accordingly, this case is DISMISSED as for failure to state a cognizable claim for relief. 6 Plaintiff’s applications to proceed in forma pauperis are GRANTED because they show that he is 7 destitute. 8 The clerk shall enter judgment and close the file. 10 Dated: December 1 , 2020. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28