Stidhem et al v. Schwartz et al

Filing 72

ORDER: Magistrate Judge Coffins Findings and Recommendation 65 is adopted. Defendants motion for summary judgment 30 is granted as to each of plaintiffs claims except the Quiznos claim. Signed on 1/18/2017 by Judge Michael J. McShane. (cp)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON DONALD STIDHEM, Plaintiff, 2:15-cv-0379-TC ORDER v. LORINDA SCHWARTC, Chaplain, et al., Defendants. _____________________________ MCSHANE, Judge: Magistrate Judge Thomas M. Coffin filed a Findings and Recommendation (ECF No. 65), and the matter is now before me. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). Plaintiff filed objections to the Findings and Recommendation. Accordingly, I have reviewed the file of this case de novo. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(c); McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore Bus. Mach., Inc., 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981). I find no error and conclude the report is correct. 1 –ORDER Magistrate Judge Coffin’s Findings and Recommendation (ECF No. 65) is adopted. I assume, without deciding, that Stidhem asked the individual officers for grievance forms as stated in his declaration. I note defendants provided strong evidence that Stidhem’s declarations could not be true because the particular officers did not work in Stidhem’s unit at the times in question. Even assuming Stidhem asked on those three occasions for a grievance form, his minimal attempts at grieving his disputes during times when, as his own declarations establish, the officers were busy, fail to establish the administrative remedies, which he clearly was aware of, were “effectively unavailable to him.” See Albino v. Baca, 747 F.3d 1162, 1172 (9th Cir. 2014) (en banc). Defendants’ motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 30) is GRANTED as to each of plaintiff’s claims except the “Quiznos” claim. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED this 18th day of January, 2017. _______/s/ Michael J. McShane________ Michael McShane United States District Judge 2 –ORDER

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?