Knickerbocker v. United States Department of Interior, Death Valley National Park, National Park Service

Filing 121

ORDER discharging Order to Show Cause and closing case 110 signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 5/1/2020. CASE CLOSED.(Lundstrom, T)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

ISSAM ELIE KNICKERBOCKER,

12
13
14
15

No. 1:16-cv-01811-DAD-JLT

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER DISCHARGING ORDER TO SHOW
CAUSE

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al.,
(Doc. No. 110 at 13 n.5)
Defendants.

16
17

On March 24, 2020, the court issued an order granting the motion for summary judgment

18

filed by defendants United States of America, Park Service Ranger Nicole Gruver, and Park

19

Service Ranger Brian Drew (collectively, “defendants”). (Doc. No. 110.) The court found that

20

plaintiff’s claims—that the rangers used excessive force in handcuffing him and that they

21

unlawfully seized him in violation of his Fourth Amendment rights, as well as his related state

22

law claims—failed as a matter of law. (See id. at 6–20.) In so holding, the court found that

23

plaintiff’s claims were “blatantly contradicted by the body camera video footage before the court

24

on summary judgment.” (Id. at 12.)

25

In an earlier order denying defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint, the court

26

had “strongly encouraged [plaintiff’s counsel] to view the video evidence with plaintiff to

27

determine whether [he] can proceed with this case in good faith,” and informed plaintiff’s counsel

28

that “[p]ursuing litigation without evidentiary support for the allegations made may result in the
1

1

imposition of sanctions.” (Doc. No. 53 at 9 n.3.) Accordingly, the March 24, 2020 order

2

granting defendants’ motion for summary judgment also ordered plaintiff’s counsel “to show

3

cause . . . why sanctions should not be imposed given the clear lack of evidentiary support

4

for plaintiff’s allegations and the claims based thereon.” (Doc. No. 110 at 13 n.5.)

5

Specifically, the order to show cause stated:
If plaintiff’s counsel takes the position that the video footage does
not discredit plaintiff’s version of the facts, he is directed to provide
the court with exact timestamps from the body camera footage which
purportedly show that: (1) “[t]he rangers forced Plaintiff’s hands
behind his back”; (2) plaintiff “complain[ed] of pain for
approximately a full hour; and (3) “Plaintiff had no choice but to
comply” with the rangers’ request for his identification, because he
was coerced into so doing.

6
7
8
9
10
11
12

(Id.)
On April 28, 2020, plaintiff’s counsel responded to the court’s March 24, 2020 order to

13

show cause. (Doc. No. 120.) Therein, counsel argues that the imposition of sanctions is not

14

warranted because he did not pursue plaintiff’s claims without evidentiary support for the

15

allegations. (Id. at 3.) Despite counsel’s position that “[he] simply did not see the line drawn in

16

the same place that the Court did” (id. at 12), the court remains completely convinced that

17

“[plaintiff’s] version of events is so utterly discredited by the record that no reasonable jury could

18

[] believe[] him.” (Doc. No. 110 at 12–13) (quoting Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372, 380 (2007)).

19

Nevertheless, the court will exercise its discretion and elect not to impose sanctions

20

against counsel here. In his opposition to defendants’ motions for summary judgment, plaintiff’s

21

counsel argued that “[t]he rangers forced Plaintiff’s hands behind his back after he continued to

22

complain of pain . . ..” (Doc. No. 93 at 14.) In response to the pending order to show cause,

23

plaintiff’s counsel creatively suggests that his use of the word “forced” in this context is at least

24

arguably open to interpretation:

25
26
27
28

Plaintiff has never maintained that the rangers grabbed his arms and
forced them behind his back when they first handcuffed him.
Instead, Plaintiff’s position has always been that the rangers forced
his hands to continue to be handcuffed behind his back without any
further adjustment or using a different method of detainment when
Plaintiff continued to be in pain until approximately one hour later
when Ranger Russell arrived and placed a belly chain on Plaintiff.
2

1

(Doc. No. 120 at 5.) In this way, counsel now suggests that by using the word “forced” in this

2

context, he was merely describing that plaintiff remained handcuffed behind his back despite

3

complaining about pain. The word counsel chose to use generally has a much different meaning,

4

one more consistent with the nature of plaintiff’s allegations underlying this action. See Forced,

5

Merriam-Webster.com (Apr. 21, 2020) (“done or produced with effort, exertions, or pressure”).

6

Though not convinced that counsel’s word choice here was entirely innocent, as he now insists,

7

the court acknowledges that it is conceivable it was not made in bad faith or with intent to

8

deceive. Based on the explanation provided by counsel in response to the order to show cause,

9

the court also finds that plaintiff’s allegations and argument that he complained of pain for

10

approximately a full hour and that he was coerced into providing his identification were not

11

obviously made or advanced in bad faith. Accordingly, here, too, the court will exercise its

12

discretion in not imposing sanctions.

13
14

Finally, the court notes that the analysis set forth in its order granting defendant’s motion
for summary judgment is completely unaffected by this order.

15

For the reasons set forth above,

16

1.

17
18
19
20
21

The March 24, 2020 order to show cause (Doc. No. 110 at 13 n.5) is hereby
discharged; and

2.

The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

May 1, 2020
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3