Rayford v. Mojica et al

Filing 11

ORDER by Judge Vince Chhabria denying 10 Motion for Reconsideration re 8 Order Dismissing Case (knm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/3/2014)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

RAPHAEL GEORGE RAYFORD,

Case No. 14-cv-02421-VC

Plaintiff,
8

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
RECONSIDERATION

v.
9
10

R. MOJICA, et al.,

Re: Dkt. No. 10

Defendants.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

On July 3, 2014, the Court dismissed this action as duplicative of a previous case Plaintiff

13

Raphael George Rayford had filed, Rayford v. Medina, et al., case number 14-1318 VC (PR). See

14

Doc. no. 8. Judgment also was entered on July 3, 2014. See Doc. no. 9. On July 11, 2014,

15

Rayford filed this motion for reconsideration in which he argues that his claims in this case are

16

based on different events than the claims in his previous case. Rayford argues that this case is not

17

based upon the alleged July 2013 pepper spray incident upon which the previous case was based,

18

but upon the fact that he was prevented from appealing the guilty findings of two allegedly false

19

rules violations reports that were based upon the alleged pepper spray incident.

20

Rayford’s motion for reconsideration is denied. The claims he seeks to bring in this

21

lawsuit are intertwined in his previous lawsuit, which also complains of the fairness of the

22

disciplinary process that stemmed from the incident. However, Rayford's allegation that he was

23

unable to file grievances related to the alleged pepper-spray incident may be relevant to the motion

24

for summary judgment based on failure to exhaust that was filed in case number 14-1318 VC (PR)

25

(Doc. no. 13). If this is so and Rayford has not already addressed this information in his

26

opposition, he may move to file a supplemental opposition to the summary judgment motion.

27
28

CONCLUSION

1
2

For the foregoing reasons, the Court orders as follows:

3

1. Rayford’s motion for reconsideration is denied.

4

2. This order terminates docket number 10.

5

IT IS SO ORDERED.

6
7
8

Dated: October 3, 2014
______________________________________
VINCE CHHABRIA
United States District Judge

9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

RAPHAEL GEORGE RAYFORD,

Case No. 14-cv-02421-VC

Plaintiff,
8
v.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

9
10

R. MOJICA, et al.,
Defendants.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S.
District Court, Northern District of California.
That on 10/3/2014, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing said
copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by depositing
said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery receptacle
located in the Clerk's office.

16
17
18

Raphael George Rayford ID: D-76886
Salinas Valley State Prison
P.O. Box 1050, Fac.: D1-111L
Soledad, CA 93960-1050

19
20
21

Dated: 10/3/2014

22
23

Richard W. Wieking
Clerk, United States District Court

24
25
26
27

By:________________________
Kristen Melen, Deputy Clerk to the
Honorable VINCE CHHABRIA

28
3