United States District Court, W.D. Oklahoma
OPINION AND ORDER
Ronald
A. White United States District Judge.
Plaintiff,
a pro se state prisoner incarcerated in Davis Correctional
Facility (DCF) in Holdenville, Oklahoma, has filed this civil
rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983,
requesting relief for alleged constitutional violations at
Cimarron Correctional Facility (CCF) in Cushing, Oklahoma
(Dkt. 1). The defendants are Cimarron Correctional Facility;
Cushion [sic] Medical (Core Civic) Nurse, Nurse Practitioner,
Doctor; and Does 1-3.
Plaintiff
alleges that while incarcerated in unsanitary conditions at
CCF, he contracted staph and scabies from being housed with
another inmate who was infected with the diseases. He further
claims the defendants failed to properly treat his medical
conditions. After review of the complaint, the Court finds
Plaintiff must file an amended civil rights complaint on the
Court's form, as set forth below.
Screening/Dismissal
Standards
Federal
courts must engage in a preliminary screening of cases in
which prisoners seek redress from a governmental entity or
officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915A(a). The Court must identify any cognizable
claims and dismiss any claims which are frivolous, malicious,
fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or
seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such
relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b); 28 U.S.C. §
1915(e)(2)(B).
The
pleading standard for all civil actions was articulated in
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007).
See Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 684 (2009). To
avoid dismissal for failure to state a claim under
Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), a complaint must present factual
allegations, assumed to be true, that ''raise a right
to relief above the speculative level.''
Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555. The complaint must contain
''enough facts to state a claim to relief that is
plausible on its face.'' Id. at 570. A court
must accept all the well-pleaded allegations of the complaint
as true, even if doubtful in fact, and must construe the
allegations in the light most favorable to the plaintiff.
Id. at 555-56. ''So, when the allegations in
a complaint, however true, could not raise a claim of
entitlement to relief, '' the cause of action should
be dismissed. Id. at 558. The Court applies the same
standard of review for dismissals under 28 U.S.C. §
1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) that is employed for Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6)
motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim. Kay v.
Bemis, 500 F.3d 1214, 1217-18 (10th Cir. 2007).
A pro
se plaintiff's complaint must be broadly construed under
this standard. Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94
(2007); Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972).
The generous construction to be given to the pro se
litigant's allegations, however, ''does not
relieve the plaintiff of the burden of alleging sufficient
facts on which a recognized legal claim could be
based.'' Hall v. Bellmon, 935 F.2d 1106,
1110 (10th Cir. 1991). Notwithstanding a pro se
plaintiff's various mistakes or misunderstandings of
legal doctrines or procedural requirements, ''if a
court can reasonably read the pleadings to state a valid
claim on which the plaintiff could prevail, it should do so .
. . .'' Id. A reviewing court need not
accept ''mere conclusions characterizing pleaded
facts.'' Bryson v. City of Edmond, 905 F.2d
1386, 1390 (10th Cir. 1990). ''While a complaint
attacked by a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss does not need
detailed factual allegations, a plaintiff's obligation to
provide the grounds of his entitlement to relief requires
more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation
of the elements of a cause of action will not do.''
Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555 (quotations and citations
omitted). The court ''will not supply additional
factual allegations to round out a plaintiff's complaint
or construct a legal theory on a plaintiff's
behalf.'' Whitney v. New Mexico, 113 F.3d
1170, 1173-74 (10th Cir. 1997).
Amended
Complaint
Within
twenty-one (21) days of the entry of this Order, Plaintiff
must file an amended complaint on the Court's form. The
amended complaint must set forth the full name of each person
he is suing under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See Sutton v.
Utah State Sch. for the Deaf & Blind, 173 F.3d 1226,
1237 (10th Cir. 1999) (holding that ''a cause of
action under' 1983 requires a deprivation of a civil
right by a 'person' acting under color of state
law''). Because Cimarron Correctional Facility and
Cushion Medical are not ''persons, '' they
may not be named as defendants in the amended complaint. As
for unnamed Defendants Nurse, Nurse Practitioner, Doctor, and
Does 1-3, Plaintiff is responsible for providing sufficient
information for service of process. See Lee v.
Armontrout, 991 F.2d 487, 489 (8th Cir. 1993) (plaintiff
proceeding in forma pauperis and pro se had
responsibility to provide correct names and proper addresses
for service of process).
Plaintiff
must provide a short and plain statement of when and how each
named defendant violated his constitutional rights and
showing Plaintiff is entitled to relief from each named
defendant. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). He also shall
identify a specific constitutional basis for each claim.
See id. He is admonished that simply alleging that a
defendant is an employee or supervisor of a state agency is
inadequate to state a claim. Plaintiff must go further and
state how the named defendant's personal participation
violated his constitutional rights. Furthermore, the Court
will only consider claims Abased upon the violation of a
plaintiff's personal rights, and not the rights of
someone else.'' Archuleta v. McShan, 897
F.2d 495, 497 (10th Cir. 1990).
The
amended complaint must include all claims and supporting
material to be considered by the Court. It must be complete
in itself, including exhibits, and may not reference or
attempt to incorporate material from the original complaint
or exhibits. An amended complaint supersedes the original
complaint and renders the original complaint of no legal
effect. See Miller v. Glanz, 948 F.2d 1562, 1565
(10th Cir. 1991); Gilles v. United States, 906 F.2d
1386, 1389 (10th Cir. 1990). See also Local Civil
Rule 9.2(c). Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 5.2(a), the amended
complaint must be clearly legible, and only one side of the
paper may be used.
The
Court Clerk is directed to send Plaintiff the proper form for
filing an amended complaint. If Plaintiff fails to file an
amended complaint in accordance with this Order, this action
shall be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which
relief may be granted.
ACCORDINGLY,
Plaintiff is directed to file within twenty-one (21) days an
amended complaint on the Court's form as directed in this
Order. The Court Clerk is directed to send Plaintiff a copy
of the form for filing an amended civil rights complaint in
this Court. Failure to comply with this Order will result in
dismissal of this action without further notice.
IT
...