(PC) Gonzales v. California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 GIOVANNI GONZALES (aka Sharon Case No. 1:19-cv-01467-AWI-BAM (PC) Gonzales), 12 ORDER DISCHARGING SEPTEMBER 28, Plaintiff, 2021 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 13 (ECF No. 29) v. 14 ORDER STAYING ACTION PENDING CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF COMPLETION OF PLAINTIFF’S SURGERY 15 CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, et al., ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANTS TO 16 FILE STATUS REPORTS REGARDING Defendants. PLAINTIFF’S SURGERY 17 NINETY (90) DAY DEADLINE 18 19 Plaintiff Giovanni Gonzales, aka Sharon Gonzales, (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner 20 proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 21 This action proceeds on Plaintiff’s first amended complaint against Defendants Diaz, Song, 22 Mitchell, and Does 1–50 in their official capacities for purposes of injunctive relief, for deliberate 23 indifference to Plaintiff’s serious medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment, and for 24 discrimination based on Plaintiff’s transgender status under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal 25 Protection Clause. 26 On March 1, 2021, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss this action as moot, arguing that 27 since the filing of this lawsuit, Plaintiff has been approved for gender affirming surgery, thereby 28 mooting his claims for injunctive and declaratory relief. (ECF No. 23.) Noting that Plaintiff is 1 seeking only injunctive and declaratory relief in this action, but that the request was for 2 completion of the surgery, rather than merely approval, the Court issued an order to show cause 3 directing the parties to submit written responses regarding whether this action should be stayed 4 pending completion of Plaintiff’s surgery. (ECF No. 29.) 5 Plaintiff filed a response on October 22, 2021. (ECF No. 30.) Plaintiff argues that his 6 case is not moot because he has only been approved for surgery, but the surgery has not been 7 completed yet. Plaintiff otherwise does not address whether this action should be stayed. (Id.) 8 Defendants’ filed a response on October 28, 2021. (ECF No. 31.) Defendants do not 9 oppose a stay of proceedings pending completion of Plaintiff’s surgery. Defendants state that 10 Plaintiff’s request for surgery has already been approved by CDCR and is anticipated to be 11 scheduled and completed in due course, as per the outside treating surgeon’s schedule and 12 recommendation. (Id.) 13 The district court “has broad discretion to stay proceedings as an incident to its power to 14 control its own docket.” Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681, 706 (1997) (citing Landis v. North 15 American Co., 299 U.S. 248, 254 (1936)). A stay is discretionary and the “party requesting a stay 16 bears the burden of showing that the circumstances justify an exercise of that discretion.” Nken v. 17 Holder, 556 U.S. 418, 433–34 (2009). “Generally, stays should not be indefinite in nature.” 18 Dependable Highway Exp., Inc. v. Navigators Ins. Co., 498 F.3d 1059, 1066–67 (9th Cir. 2007). 19 If a stay is especially long or its term is indefinite, a greater showing is required to justify it. 20 Yong v. I.N.S., 208 F.3d 1116, 1119 (9th Cir. 2000). The Court should “balance the length of any 21 stay against the strength of the justification given for it.” Id. 22 Based on the apparent agreement of the parties, and the fact that completion of Plaintiff’s 23 gender affirming surgery may moot the remaining claims in this action, the Court finds that a stay 24 of further proceedings would promote judicial economy and efficiency by eliminating the risk of 25 moot proceedings, and will conserve the resources of the Court and the parties. Defendants will 26 be directed to file regular status reports updating the Court as to the status of Plaintiff’s surgery. 27 Alternatively, the parties may file a stipulation for voluntary dismissal pursuant to Federal Rule of 28 Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) at any time. 1 Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED as follows: 2 1. The September 28, 2021, order to show cause, (ECF No. 29), is DISCHARGED; 3 2. The instant action is STAYED pending completion of Plaintiff’s gender affirming 4 surgery, including all pending motions; 5 3. Defendants shall file a status report within ninety (90) days from the date of service of 6 this order, and every ninety (90) days thereafter, addressing the status of Plaintiff’s 7 surgery; and 8 4. At any time, upon completion of Plaintiff’s surgery or by agreement of the parties, the 9 parties may file a stipulation for voluntary dismissal. 10 IT IS SO ORDERED. 11 12 Dated: November 1, 2021 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28