1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 JOHN ANTHONY GRANADOS, Case No. 23-cv-01504-JSW

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

10 MONTEREY COUNTY JAIL, Defendant. 11

12 INTRODUCTION 13 Plaintiff, a California parolee proceeding pro se, filed a civil rights complaint under 42

. He is granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis in a separate order. For the 15 reasons discussed below, the complaint is DISMISSED with leave to amend. 16 ANALYSIS 17 A. 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.

at 1915A(b)(1),(2). Pro se 23 pleadings must be liberally construed. Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep't,

(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,

(2007) (citations omitted). A complaint 6 must proffer "enough facts to state a claim for relief that is plausible on its face."

. 7 B. LEGAL CLAIMS 8 Plaintiff claims that while he was detained at Monterey County Jail for a resentencing 9 hearing, jail officials placed him in solitary confinement without due process where he was on 10 “lockdown” 23 to 24 hours per day, had no light in the cell, had no contact with others, and 11 received no treatment for his diagnosed anxiety and depression. He alleges that officials kept him 12 there for approximately three months (from June 2022 to September 13, 2022) and that despite his 13 repeated complaints, the conditions did not change. He further alleges that he was ordered 14 released on August 28, 2022, but jail officials did not release him for 16 more days. He alleges 15 that following his release he was diagnosed with a cognitive disorder that he did not have prior to 16 arriving at the jail. 17 These allegations, when liberally construed, would state a proper claim for the violation of 18 his Eighth Amendment rights if he named a proper Defendant. Plaintiff states that he is suing 19 officials at the jail, but he does not name any such officials as Defendants. The only Defendant he 20 names is the Monterey County Jail, which is simply a physical structure and not an entity that can 21 be sued. 22 If Plaintiff wants to sue the government entity that is responsible for the policies and 23 practices at the jail, he must name the County of Monterey or other government entity that runs or 24 is responsible for the jail as a Defendant or Defendants. He must also make allegations that, if 25 true, show that such entities are be liable under Section 1983. Local governments are subject to 26 liability under Section 1983 where official policy or custom causes a constitutional tort. See 27 Monell v. Dep't of Social Servs.,

(1978). A city or county may not be held 1 superior. Board of Cty. Comm'rs. of Bryan Cty. v. Brown,

(1997). To impose 2 municipal liability under § 1983 for a violation of constitutional rights resulting from 3 governmental inaction or omission, a plaintiff must show: “(1) that he possessed a constitutional 4 right of which he or she was deprived; (2) that the municipality had a policy; (3) that this policy 5 amounts to deliberate indifference to the plaintiff's constitutional rights; and (4) that the policy is 6 the moving force behind the constitutional violation.” Oviatt By and Through Waugh v. Pearce, 7

(9th Cir. 1992). Plaintiff will be granted leave to file an amended complaint 8 to name any government entity he wishes to sue as a Defendant, and if he does so, he must allege 9 that the violations he suffered were caused by a policy, practice, or custom of the government 10 entity. 11 Plaintiff may also name individual jail officials as Defendants in his amended complaint. 12 To properly state a claim against any individual official, he must allege how each individual was 13 involved in violating his rights by alleging what each individual did or failed to do that caused him 14 to suffer the jail conditions he alleges (i.e. the conditions in solitary confinement, the lack of due 15 process, the lack of medical care, the detention past his release date, etc.). 16 CONCLUSION 17 1. The complaint is DISMISSED with leave to amend. 18 2. Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint within twenty-eight (28) days from the 19 date this order is filed. The amended complaint must include the caption and civil case number 20 used in this order (No. C 23-1504 JSW (PR)) and the words “COURT-ORDERED FIRST 21 AMENDED COMPLAINT” on the first page. Because an amended complaint completely 22 replaces the original complaint, see Ferdik v. Bonzelet,

(9th Cir. 1992), 23 Plaintiff may not incorporate material from the original by reference; he must include in his 24 amended complaint all the claims he wishes to pursue. Failure to amend within the designated time and in accordance with this order will result in the dismissal of this case. 25 2. It is Plaintiff's responsibility to prosecute this case. Plaintiff must keep the Court 26 informed of any change of address by filing a separate paper with the clerk headed “Notice of 27 ] may request an extension of time provided it 1s accompanied by a showing of good cause and it is 2 || filed on or before the deadline he wants to extend. Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of 3 || this action for failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 5 || Dated: May 18, 2023 6 7 \ LF 7 / JEFFREY S/ WAITE 8 United Lnates ‘strict Judge 9 10 1]

2B

16

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