McCowan v. Hedricks et al

Filing 7

ORDER OF SERVICE; ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANTS TO FILE DISPOSITIVE MOTION OR NOTICE REGARDING SUCH MOTION; INSTRUCTIONS TO CLERK. Dispositive Motion due by 10/28/2014. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 7/30/14. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/30/2014)

1
2

*E-Filed 7/30/14*

3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11

VINCENT PRICE MCCOWAN,

B. HEDRICK, et al.,
Defendants.

15

INSTRUCTIONS TO CLERK
/

16
17

INTRODUCTION

18

20
21
22

This is a federal civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 by a pro se state
prisoner. In response to plaintiff’s first amended complaint (Docket No. 4), defendants are
directed to file a dispositive motion or notice regarding such motion on or before November
1, 2014, unless an extension is granted. The Court further directs that defendants are to
adhere to the notice provisions detailed in Sections 2.a and 10 of the conclusion of this order.

23
24
25
26

ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANTS
TO FILE DISPOSITIVE MOTION OR
NOTICE REGARDING SUCH
MOTION;

v.

13

19

ORDER OF SERVICE;

Plaintiff,

12

14

No. C 13-3554 RS (PR)

DISCUSSION
A.

Standard of Review
A federal court must conduct a preliminary screening in any case in which a prisoner

seeks redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity.

27
28
No. C 13-3554 RS (PR)
ORDER OF SERVICE

1

See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). In its review, the court must identify any cognizable claims and

2

dismiss any claims that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim upon which relief may

3

be granted or seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. See id.

4

§ 1915A(b)(1),(2). Pro se pleadings must be liberally construed. See Balistreri v. Pacifica

5

Police Dep’t, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1988).

6

A “complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim

7

to relief that is plausible on its face.’” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009)

8

(quoting Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). “A claim has facial

9

plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.” Id. (quoting

11

Twombly, 550 U.S. at 556). Furthermore, a court “is not required to accept legal conclusions

12

cast in the form of factual allegations if those conclusions cannot reasonably be drawn from

13

the facts alleged.” Clegg v. Cult Awareness Network, 18 F.3d 752, 754–55 (9th Cir. 1994).

14

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two essential elements:

15

that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and

16

that the alleged violation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law. See

17

West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988).

18

B.

19

(1)
(2)

Claims
Plaintiff alleges that (1) on June 29, 2013, Soledad State Prison Correctional Officers

20

J. Marquez, Huff, Barroso, M. Johnson, and J. Hopark used excessive force on him, and

21

(2) Barroso, F. Atrisco, B. Beebe, Harring, and M. Curiel filed false reports and committed

22

perjury. When Claim 1 is liberally construed, plaintiff has stated a claim for excessive force

23

against the listed correctional officers. His allegations regarding false reports and perjury do

24

not contain sufficient factual matter to state a claim. Plaintiff does not describe what sort of

25

report was filed, what consequences resulted from the report, or exactly how the report

26

violated his constitutional rights. Claim 2 is therefore DISMISSED.

27
28
No. C 13-3554 RS (PR)
ORDER OF SERVICE

2

Plaintiff also raises claims regarding medical treatment and the law library. These

1
2

claims involve different claims against different defendants. Consequently, they are

3

DISMISSED without prejudice. If plaintiff seeks relief on such claims, he must file separate

4

civil rights actions. The claims against defendants B. Hedrick, R. Parin, J. Stevenson,

5

Esparza, M. Curiel, F. Atrisco, B. Beebe, LVN Rodriguez, LVN Carrasco, Harrington, and

6

K.E. Heard are DISMISSED, and these persons are TERMINATED as defendants in this

7

action.

8
9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, the Court orders as follows:
1.

The Clerk of the Court shall issue summons and the United States

11

Marshal shall serve, without prepayment of fees, a copy of the complaint in this matter, all

12

attachments thereto, and a copy of this order upon J. Marquez, Huff, Barroso, M. Johnson,

13

and J. Hopark at Soledad State Prison. The Clerk shall also mail courtesy copies of the

14

complaint and this order to the California Attorney General’s Office.

15

2.

No later than ninety (90) days from the date of this order, defendants shall file a

16

motion for summary judgment or other dispositive motion with respect to the claims in the

17

complaint found to be cognizable above.

18

a.

If defendants elect to file a motion to dismiss on the grounds plaintiff

19

failed to exhaust his available administrative remedies as required by 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a),

20

defendants shall do so in a motion for summary judgment, as required by Albino v. Baca, No.

21

10-55702, slip op. at 4 (9th Cir. Apr. 3, 2014) (en banc).

22

b.

Any motion for summary judgment shall be supported by adequate

23

factual documentation and shall conform in all respects to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of

24

Civil Procedure. Defendants are advised that summary judgment cannot be granted, nor

25

qualified immunity found, if material facts are in dispute. If any defendant is of the opinion

26

that this case cannot be resolved by summary judgment, he shall so inform the Court prior to

27

the date the summary judgment motion is due.

28
No. C 13-3554 RS (PR)
ORDER OF SERVICE

3

3.

1

Plaintiff’s opposition to the dispositive motion shall be filed with the Court and

2

served on defendants no later than forty-five (45) days from the date defendants’ motion is

3

filed.
a.

4
5

In the event the defendants file an unenumerated motion to dismiss

under Rule 12(b), plaintiff is hereby cautioned as follows:

6

The defendants have made a motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b) of the

7

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, on the ground you have not exhausted your administrative

8

remedies. The motion will, if granted, result in the dismissal of your case. When a party you

9

are suing makes a motion to dismiss for failure to exhaust, and that motion is properly

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

supported by declarations (or other sworn testimony) and/or documents, you may not simply

11

rely on what your complaint says. Instead, you must set out specific facts in declarations,

12

depositions, answers to interrogatories, or documents, that contradict the facts shown in the

13

defendant’s declarations and documents and show that you have in fact exhausted your

14

claims. If you do not submit your own evidence in opposition, the motion to dismiss, if

15

appropriate, may be granted and the case dismissed.

16
17
18
19
20

4.

Defendants shall file a reply brief no later than fifteen (15) days after

plaintiff’s opposition is filed.
5.

The motion shall be deemed submitted as of the date the reply brief is due. No

hearing will be held on the motion unless the Court so orders at a later date.
6.

All communications by the plaintiff with the Court must be served on

21

defendants, or defendants’ counsel once counsel has been designated, by mailing a true copy

22

of the document to defendants or defendants’ counsel.

23

7.

Discovery may be taken in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil

24

Procedure. No further court order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(a)(2) or Local

25

Rule 16-1 is required before the parties may conduct discovery.

26
27

8.

It is plaintiff’s responsibility to prosecute this case. Plaintiff must keep the

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

28
No. C 13-3554 RS (PR)
ORDER OF SERVICE

4

1

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

2

pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

3
4
5

9.

Extensions of time must be filed no later than the deadline sought to be

extended and must be accompanied by a showing of good cause.
10.

A recent decision from the Ninth Circuit requires that pro se prisoner-plaintiffs

6

be given “notice of what is required of them in order to oppose” summary judgment motions

7

at the time of filing of the motions, rather than when the court orders service of process or

8

otherwise before the motions are filed. Woods v. Carey, 684 F.3d 934, 935 (9th Cir. 2012).

9

Defendants shall provide the following notice to plaintiff when they file and serve any

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

motion for summary judgment:

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

The defendants have made 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).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: July 30, 2014
RICHARD SEEBORG
United States District Judge

24
25
26
27
28

No. C 13-3554 RS (PR)
ORDER OF SERVICE

5