Williams v. Soto et al

Filing 5

ORDER OF SERVICE Dispositive Motion due by 4/10/2013. Signed by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers on 1/10/13. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/10/2013)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14

No. C 12-3583 YGR (PR)

JOHN WESLEY WILLIAMS,

ORDER OF SERVICE;

Plaintiff,

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

v.
A. SOLIS, et al.,
Defendants.
/

15

INSTRUCTIONS TO CLERK

16

INTRODUCTION

17
18

This is a federal civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 by a pro se state

19

prisoner. The Court now reviews the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a).

20

Defendants are directed to file a dispositive motion or notice regarding such motion on or

21

before March 20, 2013, unless an extension is granted. The Court further directs that

22

defendants are to adhere to the new notice provisions detailed in Sections 2.a and 10 of

23

the conclusion of this order.

24
25
26
27
28
No. C 12-3583 YGR (PR)
ORDER OF SERVICE

DISCUSSION

1
2

A.

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

3
4

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

5

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

6

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

7

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

8

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

9

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

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

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

11

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

12

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

13

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

14

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

15

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

16

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

17

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

18

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

19

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

20

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

21

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

22

B.

23

Legal Claims
Plaintiff’s claims against his jailors at Salinas Valley State Prison fall into two

24

categories. The first category are claims of excessive force and retaliation. The second

25

relate to a prison disciplinary process. As the second set involves different claims against

26

different defendants, those claims are DISMISSED without prejudice. If plaintiff seeks relief

27

on this second set of claims, he may file a separate civil rights action.

28
No. C 12-3583 YGR (PR)
ORDER OF SERVICE

2

1

As to the first set of claims, the complaint contains sufficient factual matter to state

2

claims against Correctional Officers Cermeno and Mejia for (1) the use of excessive force on

3

June 27, 2011, and (2) making threats and other acts of retaliation. The complaint also states

4

a due process claim against A. Solis, Soto, Trexler, V. Solis, and R. Machuca, for their

5

handling of plaintiff’s grievances against Cermeno and Mejia. Liberally construed, these

6

claims are cognizable under § 1983.

7

CONCLUSION

8

For the foregoing reasons, the Court orders as follows:

9

1.

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

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

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

11

attachments thereto, and a copy of this order upon Correctional Officers Cermeno, Mejia,

12

A. Solis, Soto, Trexler, V. Solis, and R. Machuca, at Salinas Valley State Prison. The Clerk

13

shall also mail courtesy copies of the complaint and this order to the California Attorney

14

General’s Office.

15

2.

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

16

a 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 an unenumerated Rule 12(b) motion pursuant to Wyatt v. Terhune,

21

315 F.3d 1108, 1119–20 (9th Cir. 2003), cert. denied Alameida v. Terhune, 540 U.S. 810

22

(2003). Plaintiff is “entitled to notice — similar to the notice for motions for summary

23

judgment described in Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952 (9th Cir.1998) (en banc ) —

24

explaining the requirements for a response to” a motion to dismiss for failure to

25

exhaust administrative remedies. Stratton v. Buck, No. 10-35656, slip op. 11477, 11483

26

(9th Cir. Sept. 19, 2012).

27
28
No. C 12-3583 YGR (PR)
ORDER OF SERVICE

3

b.

1

Any motion for summary judgment shall be supported by adequate

2

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

3

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

4

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

5

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

6

the date the summary judgment motion is due.

7

3.

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

8

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

9

filed.

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

a.

In the event the defendants file an unenumerated motion to dismiss

11

under Rule 12(b) (such as a motion to dismiss for failure to exhaust administrative remedies),

12

plaintiff is hereby cautioned as follows:

13

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

14

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

15

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

16

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

17

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

18

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

19

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

20

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

21

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

22

appropriate, may be granted and the case dismissed.

23
24
25
26
27

b.

In the event defendants file a motion for summary judgment,

the Ninth Circuit has held that the following notice should be given to plaintiffs:
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

28
No. C 12-3583 YGR (PR)
ORDER OF SERVICE

4

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

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 in favor of defendants, your case will be dismissed and
there will be no trial. See Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952, 963 (9th Cir. 1998)
(en banc). Plaintiff is advised to read Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure and Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986) (holding party
opposing summary judgment must come forward with evidence showing
triable issues of material fact on every essential element of his claim). Plaintiff
is cautioned that failure to file an opposition to defendants’ motion for
summary judgment may be deemed to be a consent by plaintiff to the granting
of the motion, and granting of judgment against plaintiff without a trial. See
Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 53–54 (9th Cir. 1995) (per curiam); Brydges v.
Lewis, 18 F.3d 651, 653 (9th Cir. 1994).
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

defendants, or defendants’ counsel once counsel has been designated, by mailing a true copy
of the document to defendants or defendants’ counsel.
7.

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

Procedure. No further court order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(a)(2) or Local
Rule 16-1 is required before the parties may conduct discovery.
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
fashion. Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of this action for failure to prosecute
pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

27
28
No. C 12-3583 YGR (PR)
ORDER OF SERVICE

5

1
2
3

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

4

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

5

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

6

otherwise before the motions are filed. Woods v. Carey, No. 09-15548, slip op. 7871, 7874

7

(9th Cir. July 6, 2012). Defendants shall provide the following notice to plaintiff when

8

they file and serve any motion for summary judgment:

9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

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: January 10, 2013
YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

No. C 12-3583 YGR (PR)
ORDER OF SERVICE

6