Gaskins v. Antero Resources Corp.

Background

Joseph Benton Gaskins, a California prisoner proceeding without an attorney, filed a civil-rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The caption names Antero Resources Corp. as the defendant, while the opinion refers to the defendant as Antero Resources Group. The court separately granted Gaskins’s application to proceed without paying the filing fee.

Gaskins alleged that he was sent from Santa Rita Jail to court on December 21, 2021, and then to Coalinga State Hospital. He stated that he had not received personal property at Coalinga, including some legal work. He also referred to oil and gas prices and requested that payments be sent to an address in Nevada.

Court’s analysis

The court screened the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, which requires preliminary review of a prisoner’s case against a governmental entity or officer. The court explained that a claim under § 1983 requires allegations showing both a violation of a constitutional or federal right and action by a person acting under state law.

The court determined that the complaint did not allege facts connecting the defendant to the claimed deprivation. Gaskins did not explain what type of entity the defendant was, where it was located, whether it acted under state law, or what actions or omissions caused a violation of his constitutional rights. He also did not identify who was responsible for the alleged property deprivation. The court further stated that the relevance of the allegations concerning oil and gas prices and payments was not apparent.

Disposition

The court ordered that the complaint be dismissed with leave to amend. Gaskins was required to file an amended complaint by September 30, 2022, using the case caption and number stated in the order and including the words “COURT-ORDERED FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT” on the first page. The court explained that an amended complaint completely replaces the original, so Gaskins had to include all claims he wished to pursue rather than incorporate the original complaint by reference.

The court stated that if Gaskins failed to file an amended complaint on time, or if the amendment did not correct the deficiencies, the case would be dismissed. It also reminded him that failing to prosecute the case or comply with court orders could result in dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). The order was signed by Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley.