(PC) Van Gessel v. Moore

District Court, E.D. California·Decided October 14, 2020·No. 1:18-cv-01478·Unknown

Opinion

11 CHRISTOPHER ALLEN VAN GESSEL, 1:18-cv-01478-DAD-GSA-PC

12 Plaintiff, ORDER PERMITTING PLAINTIFF OPPORTUNITY TO WITHDRAW HIS 13 vs. OPPOSITIONS TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND MOTION 14 THOMAS MOORE, et al., TO DISMISS, AND FILE AMENDED OPPOSITIONS IN LIGHT OF RAND NOTICE 15 Defendants. THIRTY- DAY DEADLINE 16 18 Christopher Allen Van Gessel (“Plaintiff”) is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se and in 19 forma pauperis with this civil rights action pursuant to Bivens vs. Six Unknown Agents, 403 20 U.S. 388 (1971) and the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), 28 U.S.C. § 1346(b). On July 9, 2020, 21 Defendants filed a motion to dismiss and a motion for summary judgment. (ECF Nos. 24, 25.) 22 On July 23, 2020, Plaintiff filed a consolidated opposition to both of the motions. (ECF No. 27.) 23 On July 28, 2020, Defendants filed a reply to the consolidated opposition. (ECF No. 28.) 24 Defendants did not provide Plaintiff with a Rand2 Notice and Warning, pursuant to the 25 Ninth Circuit’s requirement in Woods v. Carey, 684 F.3d 934 (9th Cir. 2012), informing Plaintiff 26 of his rights and responsibilities in opposing Defendants’ motion for summary judgment. 27 28 2Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952 (9th Cir. 1998) (en banc). 1 Therefore, the court shall by this order, provide Plaintiff with a Rand Notice and Warning and 2 allow him an opportunity to withdraw his consolidated opposition to Defendants’ pending 3 motions and file two separate amended oppositions, one to the motion to dismiss and one to the 4 motion for summary judgment. Defendants shall have twenty days from the dates of filing of 5 Plaintiff’s amended oppositions in which to reply to each of the amended oppositions. 6 Plaintiff is advised not to file both of his amended oppositions in one document. The 7 motion to dismiss, and the motion for summary judgment are two distinctly separate motions that 8 require different responses. Consolidating both of Plaintiff’s oppositions into one document may 9 prejudice Plaintiff and therefore is discouraged. 11 In the Ninth Circuit, when the plaintiff is a prisoner proceeding pro se in a civil rights 12 case, and a defendant files a motion for summary judgment or a motion to dismiss for failure to 13 exhaust administrative remedies, the defendant or the court is required to provide plaintiff with 14 a Notice and Warning informing the plaintiff of his or her rights and responsibilities in opposing 15 the motion. Woods v. Carey, 684 F.3d 934 (9th Cir. 2012).1 The court shall, by this notice, 16 notify Plaintiff of the following rights and requirements for opposing Defendant’s motion for 17 summary judgment: 18 NOTICE AND WARNING OF REQUIREMENTS FOR OPPOSING 20 Pursuant to Woods v. Carey, the Court now hereby notifies Plaintiff of the following 21 rights and requirements for opposing Defendants’ motion for summary judgment. Woods, 684 22 F.3d 934 (Fair notice of the requirements needed to defeat a defendant’s motion for summary 23 judgment must be provided to a pro se prisoner litigant in a civil rights case.) If . . . 24 defendants fail to provide appropriate notice, “the ultimate responsibility of assuring that the 25 prisoner receives fair notice remains with the district court.” Woods, 684 F.3d at 940. 26

27 1 Defendants were not required to provide Plaintiff with a notice of requirements for 28 opposing their motion to dismiss, because their motion is not a motion to dismiss for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. See Woods, 684 F.3d 934. 1 NOTICE AND WARNING: 2 The defendants have made a motion for summary judgment by which 3 they seek to have your case dismissed. A motion for summary judgment 4 under Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure will, if granted, end 5 your case. 6 Rule 56 tells you what you must do in order to oppose a motion for 7 summary judgment. Generally, summary judgment must be granted when 8 there is no genuine issue of material fact— that is, if there is no real dispute 9 about any fact that would affect the result of your case, the party who asked 10 for summary judgment is entitled to judgment as a matter of law, which will 11 end your case. When a party you are suing makes a motion for summary 12 judgment that is properly supported by declarations (or other sworn 13 testimony), you cannot simply rely on what your complaint says. Instead, 14 you must set out specific facts in declarations, depositions, answers to 15 interrogatories, or authenticated documents, as provided in Rule [56(c)],2 16 that contradict the facts shown in the defendant’s declarations and 17 documents and show that there is a genuine issue of material fact for trial. If 18 you do not submit your own evidence in opposition, summary judgment, if 19 appropriate, may be entered against you. If summary judgment is granted, 20 your case will be dismissed and there will be no trial. 22 Defendants have filed a motion for summary judgment for failure to 23 exhaust administrative remedies as to one or more claims in the complaint. 24 The failure to exhaust administrative remedies is subject to a motion for 25 summary judgment or, if a failure to exhaust is clear on the face of the 26

27 2 The substance of Rule 56(e) from the 1998 version, when Rand was decided, has been 28 reorganized and renumbered with the current version of Rule 56(c). 1 complaint, a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6). Albino v. Baca, 747 F.3d 2 1162, 1166 (9th Cir. 2014). For a motion for summary judgment for failure 3 to exhaust administrative remedies, the district court will consider materials 4 beyond the pleadings; “the plaintiff has a ‘right to file counter-affidavits or 5 other responsive evidentiary materials.’” Stratton v. Buck, 697 F.3d 1004, 6 1008 (9th Cir. 2012), quoting Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952, 960 (9th Cir. 7 1998). 8 If the Court determines that all of the claims are unexhausted, the 9 case will be dismissed, which means Plaintiff’s case is over. If some of the 10 claims are exhausted and some are unexhausted, the unexhausted claims will 11 be dismissed and the case will proceed forward only on the exhausted claims. 12 Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199, 219-224, 127 S. Ct. 910, 923-26 (2007). A 13 dismissal for failure to exhaust is without prejudice. Id. 14 Unless otherwise ordered, all motions for summary judgment shall be 15 briefed pursuant to Local Rule 230(l). Plaintiff is required to file an 16 opposition or a statement of non-opposition to Defendants’ motion for 17 summary judgment. Local Rule 230(l). If Plaintiff fails to file an opposition 18 or a statement of non-opposition to the motion, this action may be dismissed, 19 with prejudice, for failure to prosecute. The opposition or statement of non- 20 opposition must be filed not more than 21 days after the date of service of the 21 motion. Id. 22 If responding to Defendants’ motion for summary judgment, Plaintiff 23 may not simply rely on allegations in the complaint.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

(PC) Van Gessel v. Moore, (E.D. Cal. 2020).

(PC) Van Gessel v. Moore ((PC) Van Gessel v. Moore) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Jones v. Bock
549 U.S. 199 (Supreme Court, 2007)
Earnest Woods, II v. Tom Carey
684 F.3d 934 (Ninth Circuit, 2012)
Donald Stratton v. Julie Buck
697 F.3d 1004 (Ninth Circuit, 2012)