Johnson v. Sanchez

• Court: District Court, N.D. California
• Decided: January 3, 2023
• Docket: 4:22-cv-07858
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 PAUL DAVID JOHNSON, Case No. 22-cv-07858-JSW

8 Plaintiff, ORDER OF DISMISSAL v. 9

10 SANCHEZ, et al., Defendants. 11

12 INTRODUCTION 13 Plaintiff, a California prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this pro se civil rights complaint 14 under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against three officials at San Quentin State Prison (“SQSP”). He is 15 granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis in a separate order. For the reasons discussed below, 16 the case is DISMISSED for failure to state a cognizable claim for relief. 17 STANDARD OF REVIEW 18 Federal courts must engage in a preliminary screening of cases in which prisoners seek 19 redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. 20 1915A(a). In its review the court must identify any cognizable claims, and dismiss any claims 21 which are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seek 22 monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. Id. at 1915A(b)(1),(2). Pro se 23 pleadings must be liberally construed. Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep't, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th 24 Cir. 1990). 25 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2) requires only "a short and plain statement of the 26 claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief." "Specific facts are not necessary; the 27 statement need only '"give the defendant fair notice of what the . . . . claim is and the grounds upon 1 in order to state a claim a complaint “does not need detailed factual allegations, . . . a plaintiff's 2 obligation to provide the 'grounds of his 'entitle[ment] to relief' requires more than labels and 3 conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do. . . . 4 Factual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level." Bell 5 Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 127 S. Ct. 1955, 1964-65 (2007) (citations omitted). A complaint 6 must proffer "enough facts to state a claim for relief that is plausible on its face." Id. at 1974. 7 To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two essential elements: (1) 8 that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and (2) that the 9 alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law. West v. Atkins, 10 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988). 11 DISCUSSION 12 Plaintiff claims that Defendant Sanchez, a Correctional Officer, would not let him return to 13 the law library after he used the restroom. According to Plaintiff, Sanchez stated, “In and out is 14 over.” Plaintiff alleges that he saw Sanchez give two “Mexican” inmates permission go to the 15 chapel and one White inmate permission to go to the yard. Plaintiff claims that Sanchez 16 discriminated against him based upon race, in violation of the Equal Protection Clause. 17 Plaintiff has failed to state a cognizable claim against Sanchez. “The Equal Protection 18 Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment commands that no State shall 'deny to any person within its 19 jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws,' which is essentially a direction that all persons 20 similarly situated should be treated alike.” City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center, 473 U.S. 21 432, 439 (1985). Plaintiff’s allegations make clear that he was not similarly situated to the other 22 prisoners. First, he does not allege his race. Second, assuming his race is different from the other 23 prisoners, he was attempting to return to the law library, whereas the other prisoners were going to 24 the yard and the chapel. He does not allege that he was also prohibited from going to the chapel or 25 yard, or that the other prisoners were allowed to go to the law library. Third, he does not allege 26 that the other prisoners had the same classification, privileges, or housing restrictions as him. 27 Because the allegations do not indicate that the other prisoners were similarly situated to Plaintiff, ] claim. 2 Plaintiff makes no allegations against the other two named Defendants. 3 4 CONCLUSION

5 For the foregoing reasons, the case is DISMISSED for failure to state a claim upon which

‘ relief may be granted. 4 The Clerk shall enter judgment and close the file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

9 Dated: January 3, 2023 / ?} 10 Chi ke \ LF au) 1] / i / PEFVEN 8. ITE 12 United StatesMistrict Judge /

Oo Z 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28