1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 EUREKA DIVISION 7 8 CAMERON OMARI VINCENT, Case No. 20-cv-03129-RMI

9 Plaintiff, ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH LEAVE 10 v. TO AMEND

11 SAN FRANCISCO SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, 12 Defendant. 13 14 Plaintiff, a detainee, filed a pro se civil rights complaint under

. He has 15 been granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis (dkt. 5) and he has consented to the jurisdiction 16 of a magistrate judge (dkt. 4). 17 DISCUSSION 18 Standard of Review 19 Federal courts must engage in a preliminary screening of cases in which prisoners seek 20 redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity.

1915A(a). In its review the court must identify any cognizable claims, and dismiss any claims 22 which are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seek 23 monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief.

at 1915A(b)(1),(2). Pro se 24 pleadings must be liberally construed. Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep’t,

(9th 25 Cir. 1990). 26 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2) requires only “a short and plain statement of the 27 claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” “Specific facts are not necessary; the statement 1 rests.’” Erickson v. Pardus,

(2007) (citations omitted). Although in order to state a 2 claim a complaint “does not need detailed factual allegations, . . . a plaintiff’s obligation to provide 3 the ‘grounds’ of his ‘entitle[ment] to relief’ requires more than labels and conclusions, and a 4 formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do. . . . Factual allegations must 5 be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level.” Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 6

(2007) (citations omitted). A complaint must proffer “enough facts to state a 7 claim to relief that is plausible on its face.”

. The United States Supreme Court has 8 recently explained the “plausible on its face” standard of Twombly: “While legal conclusions can 9 provide the framework of a complaint, they must be supported by factual allegations. When there 10 are well-pleaded factual allegations, a court should assume their veracity and then determine 11 whether they plausibly give rise to an entitlement to relief.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal,

, 679 12 (2009). 13 To state a claim under

, a plaintiff must allege two essential elements: (1) 14 that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and (2) that the 15 alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law. West v. Atkins, 16

(1988). 17 Legal Claims 18 Plaintiff states that the conditions of confinement have negatively impacted his health. 19 When a pretrial detainee challenges conditions of his confinement, the proper inquiry is whether 20 the conditions amount to punishment in violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth 21 Amendment. See Bell v. Wolfish,

, 535 n.16 (1979). “‘[T]he State does not acquire 22 the power to punish with which the Eighth Amendment is concerned until after it has secured a 23 formal adjudication of guilt in accordance with due process of law. Where the State seeks to 24 impose punishment without such an adjudication, the pertinent guarantee is the Due Process 25 Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.’”

(quoting Ingraham v. Wright,

, 671-72 26 n.40 (1977)). 27 A claim for a violation of a pretrial detainee’s right to adequate medical care also arises 1 Orange,

, 1122 & n.4 (9th Cir. 2018). The claim is evaluated under an objective 2 deliberate indifference standard.

3 [T]he elements of a pretrial detainee’s medical care claim against an individual defendant under the due process clause of the Fourteenth 4 Amendment are: (i) the defendant made an intentional decision with respect to the conditions under which the plaintiff was confined; (ii) 5 those conditions put the plaintiff at substantial risk of suffering serious harm; (iii) the defendant did not take reasonable available 6 measures to abate that risk, even though a reasonable official in the circumstances would have appreciated the high degree of risk 7 involved—making the consequences of the defendant's conduct obvious; and (iv) by not taking such measures, the defendant caused 8 the plaintiff's injuries. 9

. With regard to the third element, the defendant’s conduct must be objectively 10 unreasonable – “a test that will necessarily turn[] on the facts and circumstances of each particular 11 care.”

(citations and internal quotation marks omitted). The four-part test articulated in Gordon 12 requires the plaintiff to prove more than negligence, but less than subjective intent – something 13 akin to reckless disregard.

14 Plaintiff states that he has become Vitamin D deficient due to the lack of sunlight over the 15 last five years and has suffered from depression, low testosterone, and weak bones and teeth. 16 Compl. (dkt. 1) at 3. For relief, Plaintiff seeks money damages and 30 minutes to 60 minutes of 17 sunlight a day. Plaintiff identifies no defendants in this action.

He also states that the jail is 18 currently in litigation about this issue and a decision should be forthcoming soon. Id. at 2. 19 The complaint is dismissed with leave to amend to provide more information. Plaintiff 20 must identify specific defendants by name and describe how they violated his constitutional rights. 21 He must describe if and how he has requested access to sunlight or time outside and what resulted. 22 He must describe how much outdoor time he receives each week and if he has raised his medical 23 concerns with prison medical officials and how they responded. Finally, Plaintiff must provide 24 more information regarding the current litigation about the access to, or lack thereof, sunlight and 25 if he is a party to that case. Plaintiff should also indicate if he is awaiting trial or has already been 26 convicted of the offense that he is currently being held in custody. 27 CONCLUSION 1 forth above. The amended complaint must be filed within twenty-eight (28) days of the date this 2 || order is filed and must include the caption and civil case number used in this order and the words 3 AMENDED COMPLAINT on the first page. Because an amended complaint completely replaces 4 || the original complaint, Plaintiff must include all the claims he wishes to present. See Ferdik v. 5 || Bonzelet,

(9th Cir. 1992). He may not incorporate material from the original 6 || complaint by reference. Failure to amend within the designated time will result in the dismissal of 7 this case. 8 It is Plaintiffs responsibility to prosecute this case. Plaintiff must keep the court informed 9 || of any change of address by filing a separate paper with the clerk headed “Notice of Change of 10 || Address,” and must comply with the court’s orders in a timely fashion. Failure to do so may result 11 in the dismissal of this action for failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12 || 41(b). 13 IT IS SO ORDERED. 14 |] Dated: July 8, 2020 15 16 | LZ 5 RO RT M. ILLMAN nited States Magistrate Judge 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28