Jones v. County of Contra Costa

Filing 16

ORDER of Service. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 9/3/2014. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service). (emcsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/3/2014)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

DYRELL W. JONES,

9

Plaintiff,
v.

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

No. C-13-2722 EMC (pr)

COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA; et al.,

12

ORDER OF SERVICE

Defendants.
___________________________________/

13
14
15

Dyrell W. Jones, an inmate at the Santa Rita Jail, filed this pro se civil rights action under 42

16

U.S.C. § 1983, complaining of conditions of confinement at the jail. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A,

17

the Court reviewed the complaint and found that it stated cognizable claims under § 1983 (1) against

18

Sergeant Challand, Deputy Swift, Deputy DeMichael, Deputy Morrison, and Deputy Lopez for the

19

use of excessive force in violation of plaintiff's Fourteenth Amendment rights, and (2) against nurse

20

Richard, Deputy Lindsey, Deputy Clawsen, Dr. McBride and the “unknown triage nurse” for

21

deliberate indifference to Mr. Jones’ medical needs in violation of his Fourteenth Amendment rights.

22

(Docket # 15.) The Court also identified various deficiencies in other claims and against several

23

other defendants in the complaint, and granted Mr. Jones leave to file an amended complaint no later

24

than March 28, 2014, cautioning that if he failed to file the amended complaint by the deadline, the

25

case would go forward with only the cognizable claims identified in that order. Id. Mr. Jones did

26

not file an amended complaint, and the deadline by which to do so has long passed. Accordingly,

27

the Court will dismiss all other defendants and claims from this action other than those listed above.

28

1

For the reasons stated above and in the order of dismissal with leave to amend,

2

1.

The complaint states cognizable § 1983 claims against Contra Costa County Sheriff’s

3

Sergeant Challand, Deputy Swift, Deputy DeMichael, Deputy Morrison, and Deputy Lopez for the

4

use of excessive force in violation of plaintiff’s Fourteenth Amendment rights, and against nurse

5

Richard, Deputy Lindsey, Deputy Clawsen, Dr. McBride and the “unknown triage nurse” for

6

deliberate indifference to Mr. Jones’ medical needs in violation of his Fourteenth Amendment rights.

7

Plaintiff must provide a true name for the person he describes as the “unknown triage nurse” no later

8

than November 1, 2014, or that person will be dismissed from this action. All other claims and

9

defendants are dismissed from this action.
2.

The clerk shall issue a summons and the United States Marshal shall serve, without

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

prepayment of fees, the summons, a copy of the second amended complaint and a copy of all the

12

documents in the case file upon the following defendants, all of whom apparently work at the Contra

13

Costa County Martinez Detention Facility:

14

18

- Sergeant K. Challand
- Deputy J. Swift
- Deputy K. DeMichael
- Deputy S. Morrison
- Deputy S. Lopez
- Deputy Lindsey
- Deputy Clawsen
- Nurse Richard
- Dr. McBride

19

3.

15
16
17

20
21

In order to expedite the resolution of this case, the following briefing schedule for

dispositive motions is set:
a.

No later than November 7, 2014, Defendants must file and serve a motion for

22

summary judgment or other dispositive motion. If Defendants are of the opinion that this case

23

cannot be resolved by summary judgment, Defendants must so inform the Court prior to the date the

24

motion is due. If Defendants file a motion for summary judgment, Defendants must provide to

25

Plaintiff a new Rand notice regarding summary judgment procedures at the time they file such a

26

motion. See Woods v. Carey, 684 F.3d 934, 939 (9th Cir. 2012).

27
28

b.

Plaintiff’s opposition to the summary judgment or other dispositive motion

must be filed with the Court and served upon Defendants no later than December 5, 2014. Plaintiff

2

1

must bear in mind the notice and warnings regarding summary judgment provided later in this order

2

as he prepares his opposition to any motion for summary judgment.

3
4
5
6

c.

served no later than December 19, 2014.
4.

The defendants may make a motion for summary judgment by which
they seek to have your case dismissed. A motion for summary
judgment under Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure will,
if granted, end your case. . . . Rule 56 tells you what you must do in
order to oppose a motion for summary judgment. Generally, summary
judgment must be granted when there is no genuine issue of material
fact -- that is, if there is no real dispute about any fact that would
affect the result of your case, the party who asked for summary
judgment is entitled to judgment as a matter of law, which will end
your case. When a party you are suing makes a motion for summary
judgment that is properly supported by declarations (or other sworn
testimony), you cannot simply rely on what your complaint says.
Instead, you must set out specific facts in declarations, depositions,
answers to interrogatories, or authenticated documents, as provided in
Rule 56(e), that contradict the facts shown in the defendants’
declarations and documents and show that there is a genuine issue of
material fact for trial. If you do not submit your own evidence in
opposition, summary judgment, if appropriate, may be entered against
you. If summary judgment is granted, your case will be dismissed and
there will be no trial. Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952, 962-63 (9th
Cir. 1998).

8
9
10
11
For the Northern District of California

Plaintiff is provided the following notices and warnings about the procedures for

motions for summary judgment:

7

United States District Court

If Defendants wish to file a reply brief, the reply brief must be filed and

12
13
14
15
16
17
18

If a defendant files a motion for summary judgment for failure to exhaust administrative remedies,
19
he is seeking to have the case dismissed. As with other defense summary judgment motions, if a
20
motion for summary judgment for failure to exhaust administrative remedies is granted, the
21
plaintiff’s case will be dismissed and there will be no trial.
22
5.

All communications by Plaintiff with the Court must be served on a defendant’s

23
counsel by mailing a true copy of the document to the defendant’s counsel. The Court may
24
disregard any document which a party files but fails to send a copy of to his opponent. Until a
25
defendant’s counsel has been designated, Plaintiff may mail a true copy of the document directly to
26
the defendant, but once a defendant is represented by counsel, all documents must be mailed to
27
counsel rather than directly to that defendant.
28

3

1

6.

Discovery may be taken in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. No

2

further court order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(a)(2) or Local Rule 16 is required

3

before the parties may conduct discovery.

4

7.

Plaintiff is responsible for prosecuting this case. Plaintiff must promptly keep the

5

Court informed of any change of address and must comply with the Court’s orders in a timely

6

fashion. Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of this action for failure to prosecute pursuant

7

to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). Plaintiff must file a notice of change of address in every

8

pending case every time he is moved to a new facility.

9

Plaintiff is cautioned that he must include the case name and case number for this

case on any document he submits to the Court for consideration in this case.

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

8.

12

IT IS SO ORDERED.

13
14

Dated: September 3, 2014

15

_________________________
EDWARD M. CHEN
United States District Judge

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

4