Ratcliff v. Akanno, et al.

Filing 41

ORDER DENYING 40 Plaintiff's Motion in Opposition to Declaration Filed by Deputy Attorney General, Catherine Woodbridge signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 8/10/2017. (Jessen, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

WILLIAM RATCLIFF,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14
15

v.
J. AKANNO, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17
18

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 1:16-cv-00584-SAB (PC)
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION IN
OPPOSITION TO DECLARATION FILED BY
DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL, CATHERINE
WOODBRIDGE
[ECF No. 35]

Plaintiff William Ratcliff is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

19

Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion in opposition to the declaration of Deputy

20

Attorney General, Catherine Woodbridge regarding Defendant Dr. Akanno, filed August 9, 2017.

21

On July 24, 2017, the Court issued an order why entry of default should not be entered against

22

Defendant Dr. Akanno. On July 26, 2017, Deputy Attorney General Catherine Woodbridge (who

23

represents all the other named Defendants in this action), filed a declaration indicating that Dr.

24

Akanno terminated his employment with the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation

25

effective December 12, 2016. (Declaration of Catherine Woodbridge ¶ 3 (Woodbridge Decl.).) Ms.

26

Woodbridge further declared she has received a request for representation from Dr. Akanno and the

27

Office of the Attorney General is currently in the process of obtaining outside counsel to represent Dr.

28

Akanno. (Woodbridge Decl. ¶¶ 4-5.) In light of Ms. Woodbridge’s declaration, the Court discharged
1

1

the order to show cause on August 1, 2017. On August 8, 2017, the Court ordered Defendant Dr.

2

Akanno to file a response to the complaint within thirty days from the date of service.

3

In his current motion, Plaintiff contends that Dr. Akanno was properly served with the

4

complaint and has had ample time to file a responsive pleading. Plaintiff is correct and the Court has

5

acknowledged that Defendant Dr. Akanno received service of process and signed a waiver of service

6

on May 9, 2017. (ECF No. 24.) However, Ms. Woodridge submitted that she never received a request

7

for representation from CDCR on behalf of Dr. Akanno because he terminated his employment with

8

CDCR on December 12, 2016. (Woodbridge Decl. ¶ 3.) On July 24, 2017, Ms. Woodbridge

9

contacted Dr. Akanno by email and received a request for representation from him on July 26, 2017.

10

(Woodbridge Decl. ¶ 4.) As Plaintiff was previously advised in prior orders, the Office of the

11

Attorney General is requesting that CDCR obtain outside counsel to represent Dr. Akanno in this

12

matter, and a response by Dr. Akanno will be forthcoming. (Woodbridge Decl. ¶¶ 5-6.) Because the

13

record supports the finding that Defendant Dr. Akanno will file a responsive pleading, Plaintiff’s

14

motion in opposition to the declaration filed by Ms. Woodbridge is denied.

15
16

IT IS SO ORDERED.

17

Dated:

18

August 10, 2017
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2