Whitley v. Javate

• Court: District Court, N.D. California
• Decided: January 6, 2021
• Docket: 5:20-cv-00680
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 REGINALD WHITLEY, 11 Case No. 20-00680 BLF (PR) Plaintiff, 12 ORDER OF SERVICE; DIRECTING v. DEFENDANT TO FILE 13 DISPOSITIVE MOTION OR DR. JAVATE ROSANA, NOTICE REGARDING SUCH 14 MOTION; INSTRUCTIONS TO Defendant. CLERK 15

17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner, filed the instant pro se civil rights action pursuant to 42 18 U.S.C. § 1983 against medical personnel at Salinas Valley State Prison (“SVSP”) where he 19 is currently incarcerated. The Court granted Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file an amended 20 complaint. Dkt. No. 9. Plaintiff filed an amended complaint which is the operative 21 complaint in this action. Dkt. No. 13. 22

23 DISCUSSION 24 A. Standard of Review 25 A federal court must conduct a preliminary screening in any case in which a 26 prisoner seeks redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a 27 governmental entity. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). In its review, the court must identify any 1 cognizable claims and dismiss any claims that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim 2 upon which relief may be granted or seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune 3 from such relief. See id. § 1915A(b)(1),(2). Pro se pleadings must, however, be liberally 4 construed. See Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep’t, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1988). 5 To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two essential 6 elements: (1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was 7 violated, and (2) that the alleged violation was committed by a person acting under the 8 color of state law. See West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988). 9 B. Plaintiff’s Claims 10 Plaintiff claims he is disabled and falls under the American with Disabilities Act 11 (“ADA”). Dkt. No. 13 at 3. In early 2002, Plaintiff was shot eleven times and has 12 suffered chronic pain due to those injuries. Id. Plaintiff claims that Defendant Dr. Javate 13 Rosana has acted with deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs ever since he 14 began seeing her in September 2017, for chronic pain problems in his leg and foot. Id. at 15 5. He claims Defendant Rosana has “willfully and maliciously, deliberately and 16 unlawfully denied [Plaintiff] of serious needed prescribed medication” because she has a 17 “personal biasness [sic] problem” with him. Id. at 7-8. Plaintiff claims he continues to 18 suffer daily from excruciating pain and can barely perform any normal daily activities 19 without his problems getting worse. Id. at 8. Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff states a 20 cognizable § 1983 claim for deliberate indifference to serious medical needs against 21 Defendant. See Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 104 (1976). 22 23 CONCLUSION 24 For the reasons state above, the Court orders as follows: 25 1. The Clerk of the Court shall mail a Notice of Lawsuit and Request for 26 Waiver of Service of Summons, two copies of the Waiver of Service of Summons, a copy 1 Defendant Dr. Javate Rosana at Salinas Valley State Prison (P.O. Box 1050, Soledad, 2 CA 93960-1050). The Clerk shall also mail a copy of this Order to Plaintiff. 3 2. Defendants are cautioned that Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil 4 Procedure requires them to cooperate in saving unnecessary costs of service of the 5 summons and the amended complaint. Pursuant to Rule 4, if Defendants, after being 6 notified of this action and asked by the Court, on behalf of Plaintiff, to waive service of the 7 summons, fail to do so, they will be required to bear the cost of such service unless good 8 cause shown for their failure to sign and return the waiver form. If service is waived, this 9 action will proceed as if Defendants had been served on the date that the waiver is filed, 10 except that pursuant to Rule 12(a)(1)(B), Defendants will not be required to serve and file 11 an answer before sixty (60) days from the day on which the request for waiver was sent. 12 (This allows a longer time to respond than would be required if formal service of summons 13 is necessary.) Defendants are asked to read the statement set forth at the foot of the waiver 14 form that more completely describes the duties of the parties with regard to waiver of 15 service of the summons. If service is waived after the date provided in the Notice but 16 before Defendants have been personally served, the Answer shall be due sixty (60) days 17 from the date on which the request for waiver was sent or twenty (20) days from the date 18 the waiver form is filed, whichever is later. 19 3. No later than ninety-one (91) days from the date this order is filed, 20 Defendants shall file a motion for summary judgment or other dispositive motion with 21 respect to the claims in the amended complaint found to be cognizable above. 22 a. Any motion for summary judgment shall be supported by adequate 23 factual documentation and shall conform in all respects to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of 24 Civil Procedure. Defendants are advised that summary judgment cannot be granted, nor 25 qualified immunity found, if material facts are in dispute. If any Defendant is of the 26 opinion that this case cannot be resolved by summary judgment, he shall so inform the 1 b. In the event Defendants file a motion for summary judgment, the 2 Ninth Circuit has held that Plaintiff must be concurrently provided the appropriate 3 warnings under Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952, 963 (9th Cir. 1998) (en banc). See 4 Woods v. Carey, 684 F.3d 934, 940 (9th Cir. 2012). 5 4. Plaintiff’s opposition to the dispositive motion shall be filed with the Court 6 and served on Defendants no later than twenty-eight (28) days from the date Defendants’ 7 motion is filed. 8 Plaintiff is also advised to read Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and 9 Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986) (holding party opposing summary judgment 10 must come forward with evidence showing triable issues of material fact on every essential 11 element of his claim). Plaintiff is cautioned that failure to file an opposition to 12 Defendants’ motion for summary judgment may be deemed to be a consent by Plaintiff to 13 the granting of the motion, and granting of judgment against Plaintiff without a trial. See 14 Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 53–54 (9th Cir. 1995) (per curiam); Brydges v. Lewis, 18 15 F.3d 651, 653 (9th Cir. 1994). 16 5. Defendants shall file a reply brief no later than fourteen (14) days after 17 Plaintiff’s opposition is filed. 18 6. The motion shall be deemed submitted as of the date the reply brief is due. 19 No hearing will be held on the motion unless the Court so orders at a later date. 20 7. All communications by the Plaintiff with the Court must be served on 21 Defendants, or Defendants’ counsel once counsel has been designated, by mailing a true 22 copy of the document to Defendants or Defendants’ counsel. 23 8. Discovery may be taken in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil 24 Procedure. No further court order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(a)(2) or Local 25 Rule 16-1 is required before the parties may conduct discovery. 26 9. It is Plaintiff’s responsibility to prosecute this case. Plaintiff must keep the 1 || timely fashion. Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of this action for failure to 2 || prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). 3 10. Extensions of time must be filed no later than the deadline sought to be 4 || extended and must be accompanied by a showing of good cause. 5 IT IS SO ORDERED. 6 || Dated: _January 6, 2021 Aah Lyn homey) BETH LABSON FREEMAN 7 United States District Judge 8 9 10 11 12

15 16

Z 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Order of Sve PRO-SE\BLF\CR.20\00680Whitley_sve 26 27