Patterson v. Crespo

Full title: ANDRE PATTERSON, Plaintiff, v. DEEANNA CRESPO, Defendant.

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Jan 3, 2012

No. C 11-06139 WHA (N.D. Cal. Jan. 3, 2012)

Opinion

No. C 11-06139 WHA

01-03-2012

ANDRE PATTERSON, Plaintiff, v. DEEANNA CRESPO, Defendant.

WILLIAM ALSUP

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT

AND RECOMMENDATION OF

MAGISTRATE JUDGE

On December 5, 2011, pro se plaintiff Andre Patterson filed this civil rights action against his landlord. Patterson also filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Dkt. No. 3). This action was initially assigned to Magistrate Judge Nathanael Cousins. Patterson, however, declined to proceed before the Magistrate Judge and the action was transferred before the undersigned judge. Prior to reassignment, Judge Cousins issued a report recommending that the motion to proceed in forma pauperis be granted, and Patterson's complaint be dismissed without prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. No objections were filed. This order ADOPTS in full the report and recommendation of Judge Cousins.

For the reasons stated in Judge Cousins' report, Patterson has shown in his IFP application that he is unable to pay the filing fee required. Patterson's complaint, however, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. In his handwritten complaint, Patterson claims that Defendant Deeanna Crespo violated his rights under the First and Fifth Amendments of the United States Constitution. He alleges that after he was threatened by an "unruly" and "violent" co-tenant, he attempted to report the incident to Defendant Crespo, who is his landlord and "an advocate for Catholic charities." Crespo allegedly told Patterson to leave her office and "banned" him "from services." Patterson claims that Franklin's actions violated his "right to a fair hearing" under the Fifth Amendment. The rest of the complaint contains excerpts of the First and Fifth Amendments.

Patterson's complaint fails to state a claim for relief under the First or Fifth Amendments because he fails to allege that Crespo was a person acting on behalf of the federal government. Patterson's complaint also fails to state a claim for relief under 42 U.S.C. 1983 because Patterson does not allege that Crespo acted under the color of law when she purportedly violated his rights.

For the reasons stated, Patterson's IFP application is GRANTED and his complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

___________

WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE