Howard 062341 v. Unknown Party

CourtDistrict Court, D. Arizona
DecidedOctober 6, 2023
Docket2:23-cv-01935
StatusUnknown

This text of Howard 062341 v. Unknown Party (Howard 062341 v. Unknown Party) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Arizona primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Howard 062341 v. Unknown Party, (D. Ariz. 2023).

Opinion

1 ASH 2 WO 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Ron D. Howard, No. CV 23-01935-PHX-JAT (ESW) 10 Plaintiff, 11 v. ORDER 12 Unknown Parties, 13 Defendant.

14 15 On April 4, 2023, Plaintiff Ron D. Howard, who is confined in the Arizona State 16 Prison Complex-Lewis, filed a handwritten letter in Jensen v. Thornell, CV 12-00601- 17 PHX-ROS. (Doc. 4421 in CV 12-00601). In a May 9, 2023 order, the Court directed that 18 the letter be filed as a new individual action. (Doc. 4425 in CV 12-00601.) In accordance 19 with that Order, the Clerk of Court commenced this action and filed Plaintiff’s letter as a 20 pro se civil rights Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 21 I. No Complaint Pending 22 Before seeking relief, Plaintiff must first have a complaint pending before the Court. 23 Pac. Radiation Oncology, LLC v. Queen’s Med. Ctr., 810 F.3d 631, 636 (9th Cir. 2015) 24 (“[W]hen a Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief based on claims not pled in the complaint, the 25 court does not have the authority to issue an injunction.”); see also Stewart v. INS, 762 26 F.2d 193, 198 (2d Cir. 1985) (“Only after an action has been commenced can preliminary 27 injunctive relief be obtained.”). Although the Clerk of Court characterized Plaintiff’s 28 motion as a “Complaint” in order to commence this action and facilitate consideration of 1 his allegations, the nature of Plaintiff’s filing remains the same: it is a motion seeking 2 medical treatment from allegedly deliberate indifferent conduct on the part of Arizona 3 Department of Corrections officials and contract medical providers, not a pleading seeking 4 relief for past harm. 5 In addition, the Complaint was not filed on the proper court-approved form. 6 According to Local Rule of Civil Procedure 3.4, “[a]ll complaints . . . by incarcerated 7 persons shall be signed and legibly written or typewritten on forms approved by the 8 Court and in accordance with the instructions provided with the forms.” (Emphasis 9 added.) Plaintiff’s Complaint is not on the court-approved form. Although the Court may, 10 in its discretion, forgo the requirement that a plaintiff use a court-approved form, see 11 LRCiv 3.4, the Court will require use of the court-approved form here because Plaintiff’s 12 Complaint substantially differs from the court-approved form. The Court will dismiss the 13 Complaint without prejudice and will give Plaintiff 30 days to file an amended complaint 14 using the proper court-approved form.1 15 II. Payment of Filing Fee 16 When bringing an action, a prisoner must either pay the $350.00 filing fee and a 17 $50.00 administrative fee in a lump sum or, if granted the privilege of proceeding in forma 18 pauperis, pay the $350.00 filing fee incrementally as set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). 19 An application to proceed in forma pauperis requires an affidavit of indigence and a 20 certified copy of the inmate’s trust account statement for the six months preceding the filing 21 of the Complaint. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2). An inmate must submit statements from each 22 institution where he was confined during the six-month period. Id. To assist prisoners in 23 meeting these requirements, the Court requires use of a form application. LRCiv 3.4. 24 If a prisoner is granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis, the Court will assess an 25 initial partial filing fee of 20% of either the average monthly deposits or the average 26 monthly balance in Plaintiff’s account, whichever is greater. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). An 27

28 1 If Plaintiff does not wish to proceed with this action, he may file a notice of dismissal pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1). 1 initial partial filing fee will only be collected when funds exist. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(4). 2 The balance of the $350.00 filing fee will be collected in monthly payments of 20% of the 3 preceding month’s income credited to an inmate’s account, each time the amount in the 4 account exceeds $10.00. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2). 5 Because Plaintiff has not paid the $400.00 filing and administrative fees or filed an 6 Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, Plaintiff will be permitted 30 days from the 7 filing date of this Order to submit a properly executed and certified Application to Proceed 8 In Forma Pauperis, using the form included with this Order, or pay the $400.00 filing and 9 administrative fees. 10 III. Leave to Amend 11 Within 30 days, Plaintiff may submit an amended complaint on the court-approved 12 form. The Clerk of Court will mail Plaintiff a court-approved form to use for filing a first 13 amended complaint. If Plaintiff fails to use the court-approved form, the Court may strike 14 the amended complaint and dismiss this action without further notice to Plaintiff. 15 Plaintiff must clearly designate on the face of the document that it is the “First 16 Amended Complaint.” The first amended complaint must be retyped or rewritten in its 17 entirety on the court-approved form and may not incorporate any part of the Complaint by 18 reference. Plaintiff may include only one claim per count. 19 A first amended complaint supersedes the original Complaint. Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 20 963 F.2d 1258, 1262 (9th Cir. 1992); Hal Roach Studios v. Richard Feiner & Co., 896 F.2d 21 1542, 1546 (9th Cir. 1990). After amendment, the Court will treat the Complaint as 22 nonexistent. Ferdik, 963 F.2d at 1262. Any cause of action that was raised in the 23 Complaint and that was voluntarily dismissed or was dismissed without prejudice is waived 24 if it is not alleged in a first amended complaint. Lacey v. Maricopa County, 693 F.3d 896, 25 928 (9th Cir. 2012) (en banc). 26 If Plaintiff files an amended complaint, Plaintiff must write short, plain statements 27 telling the Court: (1) the constitutional right Plaintiff believes was violated; (2) the name 28 of the Defendant who violated the right; (3) exactly what that Defendant did or failed to 1 do; (4) how the action or inaction of that Defendant is connected to the violation of 2 Plaintiff’ s constitutional right; and (5) what specific injury Plaintiff suffered because of 3 that Defendant’ s conduct. See Rizzo v. Goode, 423 U.S. 362, 371-72, 377 (1976). 4 Plaintiff must repeat this process for each person he names as a Defendant. If 5 Plaintiff fails to affirmatively link the conduct of each named Defendant with the specific 6 injury suffered by Plaintiff, the allegations against that Defendant will be dismissed for 7 failure to state a claim. Conclusory allegations that a Defendant or group of 8 Defendants has violated a constitutional right are not acceptable and will be 9 dismissed. 10 Plaintiff should be aware that not every claim by a prisoner relating to inadequate 11 medical treatment states a violation of the Eighth Amendment.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Rizzo v. Goode
423 U.S. 362 (Supreme Court, 1976)
Powell v. Alexander
391 F.3d 1 (First Circuit, 2004)
Eric Sanchez v. Duane R. Vild
891 F.2d 240 (Ninth Circuit, 1989)
Michael Henry Ferdik v. Joe Bonzelet, Sheriff
963 F.2d 1258 (Ninth Circuit, 1992)
Michael Lacey v. Joseph Arpaio
693 F.3d 896 (Ninth Circuit, 2012)
Farmer v. Brennan
511 U.S. 825 (Supreme Court, 1994)
In Re Circle Trading Corporation
26 F.2d 193 (Second Circuit, 1928)
Clement v. California Department of Corrections
220 F. Supp. 2d 1098 (N.D. California, 2002)
McMahon v. Shearson/American Express, Inc.
896 F.2d 17 (Second Circuit, 1990)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Howard 062341 v. Unknown Party, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/howard-062341-v-unknown-party-azd-2023.