Guillen v. Rocha
Filing
24
ORDER OF SERVICE; Directing Defendants to File Dispositive Motion or Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Judge Ronald M. Whyte on 5/4/11. (jg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/4/2011)
1
2
3
4
*E-FILED - 5/4/11*
5
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
CORRECTIONAL OFFICER ROCHA, et )
)
al.
)
)
Defendants.
)
MARCOS C. GUILLEN,
11
12
13
14
15
No. C 06-5176 RMW (PR)
ORDER OF SERVICE;
DIRECTING DEFENDANTS
TO FILE DISPOSITIVE
MOTION OR MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT
16
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a civil rights complaint pursuant to 42
17
U.S.C. § 1983. On March 3, 2011, the court conducted a preliminary screening of plaintiff’s
18
complaint and partially dismissed the complaint with leave to amend. The court found that,
19
liberally construed, the plaintiff did state a cognizable claim of retaliation. The court instructed
20
plaintiff to either file an amended complaint or notify the court within thirty days that he wished
21
to proceed with the cognizable claim found in the order. The court advised that if plaintiff did
22
neither, the court would proceed solely on the retaliation claim as presented in the complaint.
23
More than thirty days have passed, and plaintiff has not filed a notice, nor filed an amended
24
complaint.
25
Accordingly, the court orders as follows:
26
1.
The clerk of the court shall issue summons and the United States Marshal shall
27
serve, without prepayment of fees, a copy of the complaint, all attachments thereto, and a copy
28
Order of Service; Directing Defendants to File Dispositive Motion or Motion for Summary Judgment
P:\PRO-SE\SJ.Rmw\CR.06\Guillen176srv.wpd
1
of this order upon: Correctional Officer Rocha, Badge # 65173; Acting Warden M.S. Evans;
2
Chief Disciplinary Warden M. Moore III; CCII A. Williams; and CCI P. Nickerson at
3
Salinas Valley State Prison. The clerk shall also mail a courtesy copy of this order and the
4
complaint, with all attachments thereto, to the California Attorney General’s Office.
5
2.
No later than ninety (90) days from the date of this order, defendants shall file a
6
motion for summary judgment or other dispositive motion with respect to the cognizable claim
7
in the complaint as set forth above, or notify the court that they are of the opinion that this case
8
cannot be resolved by such a motion.
9
a.
If defendants elect to file a motion to dismiss on the grounds that plaintiff
10
failed to exhaust his available administrative remedies as required by 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a),
11
defendant shall do so in an unenumerated Rule 12(b) motion pursuant to Wyatt v. Terhune, 315
12
F.3d 1108, 1119-20 (9th Cir. 2003).
13
b.
Any motion for summary judgment shall be supported by adequate factual
14
documentation and shall conform in all respects to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil
15
Procedure. Defendants are advised that summary judgment cannot be granted, nor
16
qualified immunity found, if material facts are in dispute. If any defendant is of the
17
opinion that this case cannot be resolved by summary judgment, he shall so inform the
18
court prior to the date the summary judgment motion is due.
19
20
3.
served on defendant no later than thirty (30) days from the date defendants’ motion is filed.
21
22
23
24
25
Plaintiff’s opposition to the dispositive motion shall be filed with the court and
a.
In the event defendants file an unenumerated motion to dismiss under
Rule 12(b), plaintiff is hereby cautioned as follows:1
The defendants have made a motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b) of
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, on the ground you have not exhausted your
administrative remedies. The motion will, if granted, result in the dismissal of
your case. When a party you are suing makes a motion to dismiss for failure to
exhaust, and that motion is properly supported by declarations (or other sworn
testimony) and/or documents, you may not simply rely on what your complaint
26
27
28
1
The following notice is adapted from the summary judgment notice to be given to pro se
prisoners as set forth in Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952, 963 (9th Cir. 1998) (en banc). See
Wyatt v. Terhune, 315 F.3d at 1120 n.14.
Order of Service; Directing Defendants to File Dispositive Motion or Motion for Summary Judgment
2
P:\PRO-SE\SJ.Rmw\CR.06\Guillen176srv.wpd
1
2
3
says. Instead, you must set out specific facts in declarations, depositions, answers
to interrogatories, or documents, that contradict the facts shown in the defendant’s
declarations and documents and show that you have in fact exhausted your
claims. If you do not submit your own evidence in opposition, the motion to
dismiss, if appropriate, may be granted and the case dismissed.
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
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 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.
16
See Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952, 963 (9th Cir. 1998) (en banc). Plaintiff is advised to read
17
Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317
18
(1986) (holding party opposing summary judgment must come forward with evidence showing
19
triable issues of material fact on every essential element of his claim). Plaintiff is cautioned that
20
failure to file an opposition to defendants’ motion for summary judgment may be deemed to be a
21
consent by plaintiff to the granting of the motion, and granting of judgment against plaintiff
22
without a trial. See Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 53-54 (9th Cir. 1995) (per curiam); Brydges
23
v. Lewis, 18 F.3d 651, 653 (9th Cir. 1994).
24
25
26
27
28
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,
Order of Service; Directing Defendants to File Dispositive Motion or Motion for Summary Judgment
3
P:\PRO-SE\SJ.Rmw\CR.06\Guillen176srv.wpd
1
or defendants’ counsel once counsel has been designated, by mailing a true copy of the
2
document to defendants or defendants’ counsel.
3
4
7.
Discovery may be taken in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
No further court order is required before the parties may conduct discovery.
5
For plaintiff’s information, the proper manner of promulgating discovery is to send
6
demands for documents or interrogatories (questions asking for specific, factual responses)
7
directly to defendants’ counsel. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 33-34. The scope of discovery is limited to
8
matters “relevant to the claim or defense of any party . . .” See Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(1).
9
Discovery may be further limited by court order if “(i) the discovery sought is unreasonably
10
cumulative or duplicative, or is obtainable from some other source that is more convenient, less
11
burdensome, or less expensive; (ii) the party seeking discovery has had ample opportunity by
12
discovery in the action to obtain the information sought; or (iii) the burden or expense of the
13
proposed discovery outweighs its likely benefit.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(2). In order to comply
14
with the requirements of Rule 26, before deciding to promulgate discovery plaintiff may find it
15
to his benefit to wait until defendants have filed a dispositive motion which could include some
16
or all of the discovery plaintiff might seek. In addition, no motion to compel will be considered
17
by the Court unless the meet-and-confer requirement of Rule 37(a)(2)(B) and N.D. Cal. Local
18
Rule 37-1 has been satisfied. Because plaintiff is detained, he is not required to meet and confer
19
with defendants in person. Rather, if his discovery requests are denied and he intends to seek a
20
motion to compel he must send a letter to defendants to that effect, offering them one last
21
opportunity to provide him with the sought-after information.
22
8.
It is plaintiff’s responsibility to prosecute this case. Plaintiff must keep the court
23
and all parties informed of any change of address and must comply with the court’s orders in a
24
timely fashion. Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of this action for failure to prosecute
25
pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).
26
27
28
IT IS SO ORDERED.
5/4/11
DATED: _________________
RONALD M. WHYTE
United States District Judge
Order of Service; Directing Defendants to File Dispositive Motion or Notice Regarding Such Motion
4
P:\PRO-SE\SJ.Rmw\CR.06\Guillen176srv.wpd
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?