1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 DEE’ANGELO LAMAR GATHRITE, Case No. 25-cv-02371-RMI
8 Plaintiff, ORDER OF SERVICE v. 9
10 DOMINGUEZ, et al., Defendants. 11
12 13 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. 14 § 1983. He has been granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis. 15 LEGAL STANDARDS 16 Federal courts must engage in a preliminary screening of cases in which prisoners seek 17 redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 18 1915A(a). In its review, the court must identify any cognizable claims, and dismiss any claims 19 which are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seek 20 monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. Id. at 1915A(b)(1),(2). Pro se 21 pleadings must be liberally construed. Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep’t, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th 22 Cir. 1990). 23 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2) requires only “a short and plain statement of the 24 claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” “Specific facts are not necessary; the 25 statement need only ‘give the defendant fair notice of what the . . . claim is and the grounds upon 26 which it rests.’” Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 93 (2007) (citations omitted). Although a 27 complaint “does not need detailed factual allegations” in order to state a claim, “a plaintiff’s 1 conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do . . . 2 [f]actual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level.” Bell 3 Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007) (citations omitted). A complaint must 4 proffer “enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” Id. at 570. The United 5 States Supreme Court has explained the “plausible on its face” standard of Twombly as follows: 6 “[w]hile legal conclusions can provide the framework of a complaint, they must be supported by 7 factual allegations . . . [and] [w]hen there are well-pleaded factual allegations, a court should 8 assume their veracity and then determine whether they plausibly give rise to an entitlement to 9 relief.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 679 (2009). 10 To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two essential elements: (1) 11 that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and (2) that the 12 alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law. West v. Atkins, 13 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988). 14 DISCUSSION 15 Plaintiff alleges that Defendants were deliberately indifferent to his serious mental health 16 needs. 17 The treatment a prisoner receives in prison and the conditions under which he is confined 18 are subject to scrutiny under the Eighth Amendment. See Helling v. McKinney, 509 U.S. 25, 31 19 (1993). A mentally ill prisoner may establish unconstitutional treatment on behalf of prison 20 officials by showing that officials have been deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs. 21 See Doty v. County of Lassen, 37 F.3d 540, 546 (9th Cir. 1994); see also Hoptowit v. Ray, 682 22 F.2d 1237, 1253 (9th Cir. 1982) (mental health care requirements analyzed as part of general 23 health care requirements). A serious medical need exists if the failure to treat a prisoner’s 24 condition could result in further significant injury or the unnecessary and wanton infliction of 25 pain. Doty, 37 F.3d at 546; see, e.g., Conn v. City of Reno, 591 F.3d 1081, 1094-95 (9th Cir. 26 2010) (a heightened suicide risk or an attempted suicide is a serious medical need; reversing grant 27 of summary judgment where plaintiffs presented sufficient evidence for a jury to find that the 1 modified by 658 F.3d 897 (9th Cir. 2011). 2 Plaintiff states that Defendant Dominguez ordered Defendants Busto and Camacho to put 3 him in the shower on suicide watch, even though Plaintiff was not suicidal at that time. He was 4 placed in the shower, but Busto and Camacho did not search the shower and left Plaintiff alone. 5 Plaintiff found a ten-inch knife made out of a can that had been left in the shower. Plaintiff states 6 that he has a long history of self-harm and suicide attempts and Defendants violated his rights by 7 putting him in that situation. Liberally construed for purposes of screening, Plaintiff states a 8 claims against these Defendants for demonstrating deliberate indifference to his serious mental 9 health needs. 10 CONCLUSION 11 The Court orders that the following Defendants be served electronically at Salinas Valley 12 State Prison: Sergeant Dominguez who was the D-Facility program sergeant and Correctional 13 Officers Busto and Camacho, both who worked at the D-Facility EOP building. 14 Service on the listed Defendants will be effected via the California Department of 15 Corrections and Rehabilitation’s (CDCR) e-service program for civil rights cases from prisoners 16 in CDCR custody. In accordance with the program, the Clerk is directed to serve on CDCR via 17 email the following documents: the operative complaint (dkt. 1), this order of service, the notice of 18 assignment of prisoner case to a United States magistrate judge and accompanying magistrate 19 judge jurisdiction consent or declination to consent form, a CDCR Report of E-Service Waiver 20 form and a summons. The Clerk is also requested to serve a copy of this order on Plaintiff. 21 No later than 40 days after service of this order via email on CDCR, CDCR shall provide 22 the court a completed CDCR Report of E-Service Waiver advising the Court which Defendants 23 listed in this order will be waiving service of process without the need for service by the United 24 States Marshal Service (USMS) and which Defendants decline to waive service or could not be 25 reached. CDCR also shall provide a copy of the CDCR Report of E-Service Waiver and of the 26 notice of assignment of prisoner case to a magistrate judge and accompanying magistrate judge 27 jurisdiction consent or declination to consent form to the California Attorney General’s Office, 1 who are waiving service and, within 28 days thereafter, shall file a magistrate judge jurisdiction 2 consent or declination to consent form as to the defendants who waived service. 3 Upon receipt of the CDCR Report of E-Service Waiver, the Clerk is requested to prepare 4 for each Defendant who has not waived service according to the CDCR Report of E-Service 5 Waiver a USM-285 Form. The Clerk will provide to the USMS the completed USM-285 forms 6 and copies of this order, the summons and the operative complaint for service upon each 7 Defendant who has not waived service.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 DEE’ANGELO LAMAR GATHRITE, Case No. 25-cv-02371-RMI
8 Plaintiff, ORDER OF SERVICE v. 9
10 DOMINGUEZ, et al., Defendants. 11
12 13 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. 14 § 1983. He has been granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis. 15 LEGAL STANDARDS 16 Federal courts must engage in a preliminary screening of cases in which prisoners seek 17 redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 18 1915A(a). In its review, the court must identify any cognizable claims, and dismiss any claims 19 which are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seek 20 monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. Id. at 1915A(b)(1),(2). Pro se 21 pleadings must be liberally construed. Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep’t, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th 22 Cir. 1990). 23 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2) requires only “a short and plain statement of the 24 claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” “Specific facts are not necessary; the 25 statement need only ‘give the defendant fair notice of what the . . . claim is and the grounds upon 26 which it rests.’” Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 93 (2007) (citations omitted). Although a 27 complaint “does not need detailed factual allegations” in order to state a claim, “a plaintiff’s 1 conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do . . . 2 [f]actual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level.” Bell 3 Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007) (citations omitted). A complaint must 4 proffer “enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” Id. at 570. The United 5 States Supreme Court has explained the “plausible on its face” standard of Twombly as follows: 6 “[w]hile legal conclusions can provide the framework of a complaint, they must be supported by 7 factual allegations . . . [and] [w]hen there are well-pleaded factual allegations, a court should 8 assume their veracity and then determine whether they plausibly give rise to an entitlement to 9 relief.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 679 (2009). 10 To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two essential elements: (1) 11 that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and (2) that the 12 alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law. West v. Atkins, 13 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988). 14 DISCUSSION 15 Plaintiff alleges that Defendants were deliberately indifferent to his serious mental health 16 needs. 17 The treatment a prisoner receives in prison and the conditions under which he is confined 18 are subject to scrutiny under the Eighth Amendment. See Helling v. McKinney, 509 U.S. 25, 31 19 (1993). A mentally ill prisoner may establish unconstitutional treatment on behalf of prison 20 officials by showing that officials have been deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs. 21 See Doty v. County of Lassen, 37 F.3d 540, 546 (9th Cir. 1994); see also Hoptowit v. Ray, 682 22 F.2d 1237, 1253 (9th Cir. 1982) (mental health care requirements analyzed as part of general 23 health care requirements). A serious medical need exists if the failure to treat a prisoner’s 24 condition could result in further significant injury or the unnecessary and wanton infliction of 25 pain. Doty, 37 F.3d at 546; see, e.g., Conn v. City of Reno, 591 F.3d 1081, 1094-95 (9th Cir. 26 2010) (a heightened suicide risk or an attempted suicide is a serious medical need; reversing grant 27 of summary judgment where plaintiffs presented sufficient evidence for a jury to find that the 1 modified by 658 F.3d 897 (9th Cir. 2011). 2 Plaintiff states that Defendant Dominguez ordered Defendants Busto and Camacho to put 3 him in the shower on suicide watch, even though Plaintiff was not suicidal at that time. He was 4 placed in the shower, but Busto and Camacho did not search the shower and left Plaintiff alone. 5 Plaintiff found a ten-inch knife made out of a can that had been left in the shower. Plaintiff states 6 that he has a long history of self-harm and suicide attempts and Defendants violated his rights by 7 putting him in that situation. Liberally construed for purposes of screening, Plaintiff states a 8 claims against these Defendants for demonstrating deliberate indifference to his serious mental 9 health needs. 10 CONCLUSION 11 The Court orders that the following Defendants be served electronically at Salinas Valley 12 State Prison: Sergeant Dominguez who was the D-Facility program sergeant and Correctional 13 Officers Busto and Camacho, both who worked at the D-Facility EOP building. 14 Service on the listed Defendants will be effected via the California Department of 15 Corrections and Rehabilitation’s (CDCR) e-service program for civil rights cases from prisoners 16 in CDCR custody. In accordance with the program, the Clerk is directed to serve on CDCR via 17 email the following documents: the operative complaint (dkt. 1), this order of service, the notice of 18 assignment of prisoner case to a United States magistrate judge and accompanying magistrate 19 judge jurisdiction consent or declination to consent form, a CDCR Report of E-Service Waiver 20 form and a summons. The Clerk is also requested to serve a copy of this order on Plaintiff. 21 No later than 40 days after service of this order via email on CDCR, CDCR shall provide 22 the court a completed CDCR Report of E-Service Waiver advising the Court which Defendants 23 listed in this order will be waiving service of process without the need for service by the United 24 States Marshal Service (USMS) and which Defendants decline to waive service or could not be 25 reached. CDCR also shall provide a copy of the CDCR Report of E-Service Waiver and of the 26 notice of assignment of prisoner case to a magistrate judge and accompanying magistrate judge 27 jurisdiction consent or declination to consent form to the California Attorney General’s Office, 1 who are waiving service and, within 28 days thereafter, shall file a magistrate judge jurisdiction 2 consent or declination to consent form as to the defendants who waived service. 3 Upon receipt of the CDCR Report of E-Service Waiver, the Clerk is requested to prepare 4 for each Defendant who has not waived service according to the CDCR Report of E-Service 5 Waiver a USM-285 Form. The Clerk will provide to the USMS the completed USM-285 forms 6 and copies of this order, the summons and the operative complaint for service upon each 7 Defendant who has not waived service. The Clerk will also provide to the USMS a copy of the 8 CDCR Report of E-Service Waiver. 9 In order to expedite the resolution of this case, the court orders as follows: 10 No later than sixty days from the date of service, Defendants shall file their motion for 11 summary judgment or other dispositive motion. The motion shall be supported by adequate factual 12 documentation and shall conform in all respects to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 and shall 13 include as exhibits all records and incident reports stemming from the events at issue. If 14 Defendants are of the opinion that this case cannot be resolved by such a motion, they shall so 15 inform the court prior to the date that such motion is due. Moreover, all papers filed with the court 16 shall be promptly served on Plaintiff. 17 At the time the dispositive motion is served, Defendants shall also serve, on a separate 18 paper, the appropriate notice or notices required by Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952, 953-954 (9th 19 Cir. 1998) (en banc), and Wyatt v. Terhune, 315 F.3d 1108, 1120 n.4 (9th Cir. 2003); see Woods v. 20 Carey, 684 F.3d 934, 940-941 (9th Cir. 2012) (finding that Rand and Wyatt notices must be given 21 at the time motions for summary judgment or motion to dismiss for non-exhaustion are filed, not 22 earlier); Rand, 154 F.3d at 960 (establishing the separate paper requirement). 23 Plaintiff’s opposition to the dispositive motion, if any, shall be filed with the court and 24 served upon Defendants no later than thirty days from the date the motion is served upon him. 25 Additionally, Plaintiff must read the attached page headed “NOTICE – WARNING,” which is 26 provided to him pursuant to Rand, 154 F.3d at 953-954, and Klingele v. Eikenberry, 849 F.2d 409, 27 411-12 (9th Cir. 1988). 1 If Defendants file a motion for summary judgment claiming that Plaintiff failed to exhaust 2 || his available administrative remedies as required by 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a), Plaintiff should take 3 || note of the attached page headed “NOTICE — WARNING (EXHAUSTION),” which is provided 4 || to him as required by Wyatt, 315 F.3d at 1120 n.4. 5 If Defendants wish to file a reply brief, they shall do so no later than fifteen days after the 6 || opposition is served. The motion shall be deemed submitted as of the date the reply brief is due. 7 No hearing will be held on the motion unless the court so orders at a later date. All 8 communications by Plaintiff with the court must be served on Defendants, or Defendants’ counsel, 9 if and when counsel has been designated, by mailing a true copy of the document to Defendants or 10 || Defendants’ counsel. 11 Discovery may be taken in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. No 12 || further court order is required before the parties may conduct discovery. 13 Finally, it is Plaintiff's responsibility to prosecute this case. Plaintiff must keep the court 14 || wnformed of any change of address by filing a separate paper with the clerk headed “Notice of 15 Change of Address.” He also must comply with the court’s orders in a timely fashion. Failure to a 16 || do so may result in the dismissal of this action for failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of 3 17 || Civil Procedure 41(b). 18 IT IS SO ORDERED. 19 || Dated: April 21, 2025
21 ROBERT M. ILLMAN 22 United States Magistrate Judge 23 24 25 26 27 28
1 NOTICE -- WARNING (SUMMARY JUDGMENT) 2 If defendants move for summary judgment, they are seeking to have your case dismissed. 3 A motion for summary judgment under Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure will, if 4 granted, end your case. 5 Rule 56 tells you what you must do in order to oppose a motion for summary judgment. 6 Generally, summary judgment must be granted when there is no genuine issue of material fact-- 7 that is, if there is no real dispute about any fact that would affect the result of your case, the party 8 who asked for summary judgment is entitled to judgment as a matter of law, which will end your 9 case. When a party you are suing makes a motion for summary judgment that is properly 10 supported by declarations (or other sworn testimony), you cannot simply rely on what your 11 complaint says. Instead, you must set out specific facts in declarations, depositions, answers to 12 interrogatories, or authenticated documents, as provided in Rule 56(e), that contradict the facts 13 shown in the defendant’s declarations and documents and show that there is a genuine issue of 14 material fact for trial. If you do not submit your own evidence in opposition, summary judgment, 15 if appropriate, may be entered against you. If summary judgment is granted, your case will be 16 dismissed and there will be no trial. 17 NOTICE -- WARNING (EXHAUSTION) 18 If defendants file a motion for summary judgment for failure to exhaust, they are seeking 19 to have your case dismissed. If the motion is granted it will end your case. You have the right to 20 present any evidence you may have which tends to show that you did exhaust your administrative 21 remedies. Such evidence may be in the form of declarations (statements signed under penalty of 22 perjury) or authenticated documents, that is, documents accompanied by a declaration showing 23 where they came from and why they are authentic, or other sworn papers, such as answers to 24 interrogatories or depositions. If defendants file a motion for summary judgment for failure to 25 exhaust and it is granted, your case will be dismissed and there will be no trial.
26 27