Rubio v. Allison

Background

Robert Louis Rubio, who was housed at San Quentin State Prison, filed a civil-rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 without a lawyer. The court separately addressed his request to proceed without paying the filing fee. The complaint named Kathleen Allison and 17 other defendants, including California prison officials, state officials, a federal receiver, and officials at San Quentin State Prison and California Institute for Men.

Rubio made numerous allegations about the prison system’s response to COVID-19 in 2020. He alleged that staff and prisoners were not provided free COVID-19 testing, masks were not being worn, social distancing was inadequate, and prisoners from California Institute for Men were transferred to San Quentin without proper testing. He alleged that an outbreak followed and that he developed serious COVID-19 symptoms. He also described alleged interruptions in medical and dental care, the absence of a hot-water hose bib for cleaning a shower area, the removal of toilets from a prison yard, and the denial of outdoor exercise.

Reasons for dismissal

The court screened the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, which requires an initial review of a prisoner’s claims against governmental entities or officials. The court explained that a complaint must give each defendant fair notice of the claim and must include enough facts to show how that defendant personally caused the alleged deprivation of a federal right.

The court found that Rubio’s allegations about some defendants were too vague and conclusory. For example, merely alleging that a defendant was asked about COVID-19 conditions did not explain what the defendant did or how the defendant acted with deliberate indifference. The court also found that allegations against supervisory defendants did not adequately explain their personal involvement. A supervisor cannot be held liable under § 1983 solely because of a supervisory relationship; the complaint must connect the person’s own actions or inaction to the alleged violation.

The court said Rubio’s allegations about the transfer of prisoners and resulting COVID-19 outbreak were sufficient to state a potential claim, but he needed to provide more information about how each of the 18 defendants was involved. The court also said he needed more information about the alleged denial of medical or dental care and other prison conditions, including how those conditions violated the Eighth Amendment and how they related to the COVID-19 claims.

Joinder of claims and defendants

The court explained that multiple claims against one defendant may be included in one complaint, but claims against different defendants may be joined only when they arise from the same transaction, occurrence, or related series of events and involve common questions of law or fact. The court could not determine whether Rubio’s other claims were sufficiently related to his COVID-19 claims. It ordered that any amended complaint include only properly joined claims and defendants.

Exhaustion of prison remedies

The Prison Litigation Reform Act requires a prisoner to complete available prison administrative remedies before filing a lawsuit about prison conditions. Rubio alleged that he filed one prison grievance concerning the “COVID-19 debacle” and that it was denied, but he did not explain whether that grievance exhausted each claim against each defendant. The court therefore directed him to provide claim-by-claim information showing that he exhausted available remedies before filing the action.

Disposition

The court DISMISSED the complaint with leave to amend. It ordered Rubio to file, within 28 days, an amended complaint that separately identifies each claim, each defendant’s specific conduct, the injury caused by each claim, and the exhaustion of administrative remedies for each claim and defendant. The amended complaint also had to comply with the rules governing related claims and defendants and could not rely only on conclusory allegations or supervisory liability. The court stated that failure to file a timely amended complaint or correct the identified deficiencies would result in dismissal of the action without prejudice. The clerk was ordered to send Rubio a blank civil-rights complaint form.