United States District Court, D. Oregon
ORDER TO DISMISS
MICHAEL H. SIMON, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
an inmate at the Oregon State Penitentiary, brings this civil
rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. For the
reasons set forth below, the court dismisses Plaintiffs
alleges violation of his rights under the Eighth Amendment.
By way of supporting facts, Plaintiff alleges he was placed
on "close supervision status" as punishment for
refusing to accept a cell-mate. Plaintiff does not allege the
consequences of "close supervision status."
Plaintiff also does not allege personal involvement by any of
the named Defendants in the decision to place him on
"close supervision status."
prisoner proceeding in forma pauperis files an
action seeking redress from a governmental entity or officer
or employee of a governmental entity, the court shall dismiss
the case at any time if the court determines that:
(B) the action ...
(i) is frivolous or malicious;
(ii) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted;
(iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune
from such relief.
28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2) and 1915A(b).
order to state a claim, a plaintiffs complaint must contain
sufficient factual allegations which, when accepted as true,
give rise to a plausible inference that the defendants
violated Plaintiffs constitutional rights. Ashcroft v.
Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009); Bell Atlantic Corp.
v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 554, 556-57 (2007). "A claim
has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual
content that allows the court to draw the reasonable
inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct
alleged." Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678; Moss v.
U.S. Secret Service, 572 F.3d 962, 969 (9th Cir. 2009).
Ninth Circuit has instructed however, courts must
"continue to construe pro se filings
liberally." Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 341
(9th Cir. 2010). A "complaint [filed by a pro
se prisoner] 'must be held to less stringent
standards than formal pleadings drafted by
lawyers.'" Id. (quoting Erickson v.
Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007) (per curiam)).
dismissing a pro se civil rights complaint for
failure to state a claim, this Court supplies the plaintiff
with a statement of the complaint's deficiencies.
Karim-Panahi v. Los Angeles Police Dept, 839 F.2d
621, 623-24 (9th Cir. 1988); Eldridge v. Block, 832
F.2d 1132, 1136 (9th Cir. 1987). A pro se litigant
will be given leave to amend his or her complaint unless it
is absolutely clear that the deficiencies of the complaint