Kern

James Curtis Kern v. Pelican Bay Transportation Officer, et al.

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaNovember 14, 20253:25-cv-07288California510 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

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. 28 U.S.C. § 21 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.” Id. 24 § 1915A(b). Pro se pleadings must be liberally construed, however. Balistreri v. Pacifica Police 25 Dep’t, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1990). 26 To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, 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, 487 U.S. |} 42, 48 (1988). B. Legal Claims The failure of prison officials to protect inmates from dangerous conditions while in custody violates the Eighth Amendment only when two requirements…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.