1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 JEREMY JEROME SMILEY, Case No. 23-cv-03617-PCP
8 Plaintiff, ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT 9 v. WITH LEAVE TO AMEND, AND GRANTING MOTION TO PROCEED 10 CHRISTINA CORPUS, et al., IN FORMA PAUPERIS 11 Defendants. Docket No. 2
12 13 Jeremy Smiley, an inmate at California State Prison - Solano, filed this pro se civil rights 14 action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, regarding events which occurred while Mr. Smiley was 15 incarcerated at the Maguire Correctional Facility in Redwood City, California. The Complaint is 16 now before the Court for review under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. 17 The Complaint is dismissed because Mr. Smiley failed to state a claim. Mr. Smiley may 18 amend his Complaint if he is able truthfully to allege a cognizable claim. 19 I. Legal Standard 20 Federal courts must screen any case in which a prisoner seeks redress from a governmental 21 entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The court must 22 identify cognizable claims and dismiss claims that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim 23 upon which relief may be granted, or seek monetary relief from a defendant immune from such 24 relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1), (2). Pro se pleadings must be liberally construed. See Balistreri v. 25 Pacifica Police Dep’t, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1990). 26 II. Analysis 27 Mr. Smiley has failed to state any claim for relief because he does not identify any way in 1 Mr. Smiley states that his cellmate accused Mr. Smiley of punching the cellmate in the 2 face, and that Mr. Smiley subsequently was moved to another housing unit. Compl. at 4. However, 3 Mr. Smiley does not state that he did not punch his cellmate, nor does he identify defects in any 4 disciplinary proceedings, nor does he explain why this other housing unit was unacceptable to 5 him. See id. Mr. Smiley states that his phone and recreational privileges were reduced, but it is 6 unclear whether this reduction was a punishment or was incidental to his new housing assignment. 7 See id. It also is unclear how long this reduction in privileges lasted. See id. More information is 8 needed to state a claim. See, e.g., Sandin v. Conner, 515 U.S. 472, 485 (1995) (concluding that a brief 9 loss of privileges does not “present a dramatic departure from the basic conditions” of prison life, and 10 thus is not a deprivation of real substance); Anderson v. Cty. of Kern, 45 F.3d 1310, 1315 (9th Cir.) 11 (finding “there is no liberty interest in” the loss of recreational programs), opinion amended on denial 12 of reh’g, 75 F.3d 448 (9th Cir. 1995); Davis v. Small, 595 F. App’x 689, 691 (9th Cir. 2014) (finding 13 no liberty interest in telephone or yard privileges); Mahon v. Prunty, 87 F.3d 1320 (9th Cir. 1996) 14 (finding no liberty interest in family visits, telephone calls, or yard access) (unpublished). 15 Mr. Smiley states that inmates of different races were treated differently. See id. at 3. He 16 does not explain what harm he suffered because of this different treatment. Indeed, Mr. Smiley 17 does not even state he was a member of a comparatively disfavored group. See id. 18 Mr. Smiley states that a prison officer used her personal phone while on duty. See id. at 2. 19 He does not identify any harm that befell him as a result. See id. 20 Mr. Smiley states that in the month before his Complaint was filed, he was unable to see a 21 specific doctor regarding psychological issues. See id. at 4. However, Mr. Smiley does not state 22 that this doctor was a mental health professional, nor that he was unable to see another mental 23 health professional. See id. Mr. Smiley received other medical treatment during this time. See id. 24 Mr. Smiley attaches a grievance in which he complains he was not allowed to work in jail. 25 See id. at 16. The lack of a prison job, without more, does not state a claim because there is no 26 constitutional right to a job in prison. See Hoptowit v. Ray, 682 F.2d 1237, 1254–55 (9th Cir. 27 1982) (holding prisoners do not have a right to a job); Toussaint v. McCarthy, 801 F.2d 1080, 1 IW. CONCLUSION 2 The Complaint is dismissed because Mr. Smiley failed to state a claim. 3 Dismissal is with leave to amend to the extent Mr. Smiley can remedy the defects 4 || identified above. If Mr. Smiley wishes to pursue § 1983 claims, he may file a FIRST AMENDED 5 COMPLAINT within thirty-five days from the date this order is filed. The first amended 6 || complaint must include the caption and civil case number used in this order (CV 23-3617-PCP 7 (PR)) and the words FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT on the first page. If Mr. Smiley files a 8 first amended complaint, he must allege facts that demonstrate he is entitled to relief. An amended 9 complaint supersedes the original complaint. See London v. Coopers & Lybrand, 644 F.2d 811, 10 || 814 (9th Cir. 1981) (“[A] plaintiff waives all causes of action alleged in the original complaint 11 which are not alleged in the amended complaint.”); Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1262-63 12 (9th Cir. 1992) (where an amended complaint did not name all the defendants to an action, they 13 || were no longer defendants). If Mr. Smiley fails to file an amended complaint within thirty-five 14 || days and in accordance with this order, this action will be dismissed with prejudice. 3 15 It is Mr. Smiley’s responsibility to prosecute this case. Mr. Smiley must keep the Court a 16 || wnformed of any change of address by filing a separate paper with the Clerk headed “Notice of
17 Change of Address,” and must comply with the Court’s orders in a timely fashion. Failure to do so 18 will result in the dismissal of this action for failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil 19 Procedure 41(b). 20 Mr. Smiley’s in forma pauperis application is GRANTED. The initial partial filing fee is 21 $29.66. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1) (requiring a court to assess an initial filing fee of 20 percent of 22 || an immate’s average monthly balance or monthly deposits). A copy of this order and the attached 23 instructions will be sent to Mr. Smiley and the institution’s trust account office. 24 IT IS SO ORDERED. 25 Dated: March 6, 2024 26 Ze. 27 Z Coy P. Casey Pitts 28 United States District Judge
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 1 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 2 INSTRUCTIONS FOR PAYMENT OF PRISONER’S FILING FEE 3 The prisoner shown as the plaintiff or petitioner on the attached order has filed a civil 4 action in forma pauperis in this court and owes to the court a filing fee. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, the fee is to be paid as follows: 5
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 JEREMY JEROME SMILEY, Case No. 23-cv-03617-PCP
8 Plaintiff, ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT 9 v. WITH LEAVE TO AMEND, AND GRANTING MOTION TO PROCEED 10 CHRISTINA CORPUS, et al., IN FORMA PAUPERIS 11 Defendants. Docket No. 2
12 13 Jeremy Smiley, an inmate at California State Prison - Solano, filed this pro se civil rights 14 action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, regarding events which occurred while Mr. Smiley was 15 incarcerated at the Maguire Correctional Facility in Redwood City, California. The Complaint is 16 now before the Court for review under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. 17 The Complaint is dismissed because Mr. Smiley failed to state a claim. Mr. Smiley may 18 amend his Complaint if he is able truthfully to allege a cognizable claim. 19 I. Legal Standard 20 Federal courts must screen any case in which a prisoner seeks redress from a governmental 21 entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The court must 22 identify cognizable claims and dismiss claims that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim 23 upon which relief may be granted, or seek monetary relief from a defendant immune from such 24 relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1), (2). Pro se pleadings must be liberally construed. See Balistreri v. 25 Pacifica Police Dep’t, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1990). 26 II. Analysis 27 Mr. Smiley has failed to state any claim for relief because he does not identify any way in 1 Mr. Smiley states that his cellmate accused Mr. Smiley of punching the cellmate in the 2 face, and that Mr. Smiley subsequently was moved to another housing unit. Compl. at 4. However, 3 Mr. Smiley does not state that he did not punch his cellmate, nor does he identify defects in any 4 disciplinary proceedings, nor does he explain why this other housing unit was unacceptable to 5 him. See id. Mr. Smiley states that his phone and recreational privileges were reduced, but it is 6 unclear whether this reduction was a punishment or was incidental to his new housing assignment. 7 See id. It also is unclear how long this reduction in privileges lasted. See id. More information is 8 needed to state a claim. See, e.g., Sandin v. Conner, 515 U.S. 472, 485 (1995) (concluding that a brief 9 loss of privileges does not “present a dramatic departure from the basic conditions” of prison life, and 10 thus is not a deprivation of real substance); Anderson v. Cty. of Kern, 45 F.3d 1310, 1315 (9th Cir.) 11 (finding “there is no liberty interest in” the loss of recreational programs), opinion amended on denial 12 of reh’g, 75 F.3d 448 (9th Cir. 1995); Davis v. Small, 595 F. App’x 689, 691 (9th Cir. 2014) (finding 13 no liberty interest in telephone or yard privileges); Mahon v. Prunty, 87 F.3d 1320 (9th Cir. 1996) 14 (finding no liberty interest in family visits, telephone calls, or yard access) (unpublished). 15 Mr. Smiley states that inmates of different races were treated differently. See id. at 3. He 16 does not explain what harm he suffered because of this different treatment. Indeed, Mr. Smiley 17 does not even state he was a member of a comparatively disfavored group. See id. 18 Mr. Smiley states that a prison officer used her personal phone while on duty. See id. at 2. 19 He does not identify any harm that befell him as a result. See id. 20 Mr. Smiley states that in the month before his Complaint was filed, he was unable to see a 21 specific doctor regarding psychological issues. See id. at 4. However, Mr. Smiley does not state 22 that this doctor was a mental health professional, nor that he was unable to see another mental 23 health professional. See id. Mr. Smiley received other medical treatment during this time. See id. 24 Mr. Smiley attaches a grievance in which he complains he was not allowed to work in jail. 25 See id. at 16. The lack of a prison job, without more, does not state a claim because there is no 26 constitutional right to a job in prison. See Hoptowit v. Ray, 682 F.2d 1237, 1254–55 (9th Cir. 27 1982) (holding prisoners do not have a right to a job); Toussaint v. McCarthy, 801 F.2d 1080, 1 IW. CONCLUSION 2 The Complaint is dismissed because Mr. Smiley failed to state a claim. 3 Dismissal is with leave to amend to the extent Mr. Smiley can remedy the defects 4 || identified above. If Mr. Smiley wishes to pursue § 1983 claims, he may file a FIRST AMENDED 5 COMPLAINT within thirty-five days from the date this order is filed. The first amended 6 || complaint must include the caption and civil case number used in this order (CV 23-3617-PCP 7 (PR)) and the words FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT on the first page. If Mr. Smiley files a 8 first amended complaint, he must allege facts that demonstrate he is entitled to relief. An amended 9 complaint supersedes the original complaint. See London v. Coopers & Lybrand, 644 F.2d 811, 10 || 814 (9th Cir. 1981) (“[A] plaintiff waives all causes of action alleged in the original complaint 11 which are not alleged in the amended complaint.”); Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1262-63 12 (9th Cir. 1992) (where an amended complaint did not name all the defendants to an action, they 13 || were no longer defendants). If Mr. Smiley fails to file an amended complaint within thirty-five 14 || days and in accordance with this order, this action will be dismissed with prejudice. 3 15 It is Mr. Smiley’s responsibility to prosecute this case. Mr. Smiley must keep the Court a 16 || wnformed of any change of address by filing a separate paper with the Clerk headed “Notice of
17 Change of Address,” and must comply with the Court’s orders in a timely fashion. Failure to do so 18 will result in the dismissal of this action for failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil 19 Procedure 41(b). 20 Mr. Smiley’s in forma pauperis application is GRANTED. The initial partial filing fee is 21 $29.66. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1) (requiring a court to assess an initial filing fee of 20 percent of 22 || an immate’s average monthly balance or monthly deposits). A copy of this order and the attached 23 instructions will be sent to Mr. Smiley and the institution’s trust account office. 24 IT IS SO ORDERED. 25 Dated: March 6, 2024 26 Ze. 27 Z Coy P. Casey Pitts 28 United States District Judge
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 1 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 2 INSTRUCTIONS FOR PAYMENT OF PRISONER’S FILING FEE 3 The prisoner shown as the plaintiff or petitioner on the attached order has filed a civil 4 action in forma pauperis in this court and owes to the court a filing fee. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, the fee is to be paid as follows: 5
6 The initial partial filing fee listed on the attached order should be deducted by the prison trust account office from the prisoner’s trust account and forwarded to the clerk of the court as the 7 first installment payment on the filing fee. This amount is twenty percent of the greater of (a) the average monthly deposits to the prisoner’s account for the 6-month period immediately preceding 8 the filing of the complaint/petition or (b) the average monthly balance in the prisoner’s account for the 6-month period immediately preceding the filing of the complaint/petition. 9
10 Thereafter, on a monthly basis, 20 percent of the preceding month’s income credited to the prisoner’s trust account should be deducted and forwarded to the court each time the amount in the 11 account exceeds ten dollars ($10.00). The prison trust account office should continue to do this until the filing fee has been paid in full. 12 If the prisoner does not have sufficient funds in his/her account to pay the initial partial 13 filing fee, the prison trust account office should forward the available funds, and carry the balance 14 forward each month until the amount is fully paid.
15 If the prisoner has filed more than one complaint, (s)he is required to pay a filing fee for each case. The trust account office should make the monthly calculations and payments for each 16 case in which it receives an order granting in forma pauperis and these instructions.
17 The prisoner’s name and case number must be noted on each remittance. The initial 18 partial filing fee is due within thirty days of the date of the attached order. Checks should be made payable to Clerk, U.S. District Court and sent to Prisoner Accounts Receivable, U.S. District 19 Court, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, Box 36060, San Francisco, CA 94102.
20 cc: Plaintiff/Petitioner 21
22 23 24 25 26 27