1 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 4 5 JAMES CURTIS KERN, BX3065, Case No. 25-cv-07288-CRB (PR)

6 Plaintiff, ORDER OF DISMISSAL 7 v.

8 PELICAN BAY TRANSPORTATION OFFICER, et al., 9 Defendant(s). 10 Plaintiff, a prisoner at Pelican Bay State Prison (PBSP), has filed a pro se complaint under 11

alleging that on June 24, 2025, while PBSP correctional officers were escorting 12 him to San Joaquin General Hospital for the removal of a lipoma from his left forearm, he fell 13 exiting the prison transportation van when the chain on his foot shackles “slid under” and “became 14 stuck” on a “defective stripping on the floor of the van [that] had screws missing.” ECF No. 1 15 (Compl.) at 3. Plaintiff alleges that the hard fall “bust[ed] my knee[]caps on the floor” and forced 16 the “cuffs on my foot shackles . . . to engrave into the rear of my feet just above my heels.”

17 DISCUSSION 18 A. 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). The court must identify cognizable claims or dismiss the complaint, or any portion of 22 the complaint, if the complaint “is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief 23 may be granted,” or “seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief.”

24 § 1915A(b). Pro se pleadings must be liberally construed, however. Balistreri v. Pacifica Police 25 Dep’t,

(9th Cir. 1990). 26 To state a claim under

, a plaintiff must allege two elements: (1) that a 27 right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and (2) that the alleged ] violation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law. West v. Atkins,

|} 42, 48 (1988). 3 B. Legal Claims 4 The failure of prison officials to protect inmates from dangerous conditions while in 5 custody violates the Eighth Amendment only when two requirements are met: (1) the deprivation 6 || alleged is, objectively, sufficiently serious; and (2) the prison official is, subjectively, deliberately 7 || indifferent to inmate health or safety. Farmer v. Brennan,

(1994). A prison 8 official is deliberately indifferent if he knows of and disregards an excessive risk to inmate health 9 || or safety by failing to take reasonable steps to abate it.

. Neither negligence nor gross 10 || negligence will do. See

at 835-36 & n.4 (neither negligence nor gross negligence actionable 11 under § 1983 in prison context). 12 Although regrettable, plaintiff's allegations that he sustained serious injuries from falling 13 exiting a prison transportation van on June 24, 2025 because the chain on his foot shackles got 14 || stuck on a defective stripping on the floor of the van must be dismissed because the allegations 3 15 amount to no more than a claim for negligence or gross negligence not actionable under § 1983 in 16 the prison context. See id.; see also County of Sacramento v. Lewis,

(1998) i 17 || (negligence not actionable under § 1983 outside prison context). Plaintiffs suggestion that prison Zz 18 officials should have performed a better inspection of the van and that the escorting officers 19 || should have helped him out of the van illustrate that his claims sound in classic negligence or 20 || gross negligence, not deliberate indifference. A claim for negligence or gross negligence must be 21 pursued in state court. 22 CONCLUSION 23 For the foregoing reasons, the complaint is DISMISSED under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) for 24 || failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. 25 IT ISSO ORDERED. 26 Dated: November 14, 2025

CHARLES R. BREYER 28 United States District Judge