(PC) Rogers v. Matteson ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MAURICE DI AUNDRA ROGERS, No. 2:22-cv-0403 CKD P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 GISELLE MATTESON, et al. 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and seeking relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 18 1983. On April 11, 2022, the court screened plaintiff’s complaint as the court is required to do 19 under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. The court dismissed plaintiff’s complaint with leave to file an 20 amended complaint. Plaintiff has filed an amended complaint which the court now screens. 21 The court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that 22 are legally “frivolous or malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or 23 that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 24 1915A(b)(1),(2). 25 Having conducted the required screening, the court finds that plaintiff may proceed on a 26 claim arising under the First Amendment against defendant Ray Smith as detailed in claim I of 27 plaintiff’s amended complaint. In all other respects, the amended complaint does not state 28 actionable claims. At this point, plaintiff has two options: 1) proceed on the claim identified 1 | above; or 2) attempt to cure the deficiencies in plaintiff's amended complaint in a second 2 || amended complaint. In considering whether to amend a second time, the court advises plaintiff as 3 || follows: 4 1. There can be no liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 unless there is some affirmative link 5 || or connection between a defendant’s actions and the claimed deprivation. Rizzo v. Goode, 423 6 || U.S. 362 (1976). Furthermore, vague and conclusory allegations of official participation in civil 7 || rights violations are not sufficient. Ivey v. Board of Regents, 673 F.2d 266, 268 (9th Cir. 1982). 8 2. In general, plaintiff's allegations should not be vague or conclusory. Plaintiff must 9 || point to specific acts in order to establish an actionable claim. 10 3. Prisoner legal mail related to civil actions is not entitled to Sixth Amendment 11 || protection. Turner v. Rogers, 564 U.S. 431, 441 (2011). 12 In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff is granted 21 days 13 || within which to complete and return the attached form notifying the court whether he wants to 14 || proceed on a claim arising under the First Amendment against defendant Ray Smith or whether 15 || he wishes to file a second amended complaint in an attempt to cure the deficiencies in his 16 || amended complaint. If plaintiff does not return the form, this action will proceed on the claim 17 || described above. 18 | Dated: October 12, 2022 □□ / del a 19 CAROLYNK. DELANEY 20 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 21 22 23 | 1 34 roge0403.op 25 26 27 28 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 MAURICE DI AUNDRA ROGERS, No. 2:22-cv-0403 CKD P 11 Plaintiff, 12 v. PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF 13 GISELLE MATTESON, et al., HOW TO PROCEED 14 Defendants. 15 16 17 Check one: 18 _____ Plaintiff wants to proceed immediately on a claim arising under the First Amendment 19 against defendant Ray Smith; or 20 _____ Plaintiff wants time to file an second amended complaint. 21 DATED: 22 23 24 25 26 Plaintiff’s Signature 27 28