Lorenzini v. Ragasa ( 2024 )

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 BENJAMIN JOSEPH LORENZINI, Case No. 23-cv-05904-RMI 8 Plaintiff, ORDER OF SERVICE v. 9 10 RAGASA, 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 statement 25 need only ‘give the defendant fair notice of what the . . . claim is and the grounds upon which it 26 rests.’” Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 93 (2007) (citations omitted). Although in order to state a 27 claim a complaint “does not need detailed factual allegations . . . a plaintiff’s obligation to provide 1 formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do . . . [f]actual allegations must 2 be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level.” Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 3 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007) (citations omitted). A complaint must proffer “enough facts to state a 4 claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” Id. at 570. The United States Supreme Court has 5 recently explained the “plausible on its face” standard of Twombly as such: “[w]hile legal 6 conclusions can provide the framework of a complaint, they must be supported by factual 7 allegations . . . [and] [w]hen there are well-pleaded factual allegations, a court should assume their 8 veracity and then determine whether they plausibly give rise to an entitlement to relief.” Ashcroft 9 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 a correctional officer assaulted him causing injuries. 16 The treatment a convicted prisoner receives in prison and the conditions under which he is 17 confined are subject to scrutiny under the Eighth Amendment. Helling v. McKinney, 509 U.S. 25, 18 31 (1993). “After incarceration, only the unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain . . . constitutes 19 cruel and unusual punishment forbidden by the Eighth Amendment.” Whitley v. Albers, 475 U.S. 20 312, 319 (1986) (ellipsis in original) (internal quotation and citation omitted). When prison 21 officials stand accused of using excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment, the core 22 judicial inquiry is whether force was applied in a good-faith effort to maintain or restore 23 discipline, or maliciously and sadistically to cause harm. Hudson v. McMillian, 503 U.S. 1, 6-7 24 (1992). 25 In determining whether the use of force was for the purpose of maintaining or restoring 26 discipline, or for the malicious and sadistic purpose of causing harm, a court may evaluate the 27 need for application of force, the relationship between that need and the amount of force used, the 1 efforts made to temper the severity of a forceful response. Hudson at 7. 2 Plaintiff states that on October 10, 2023, Correctional Officer Ragasa slammed the 3 handcuff port in Plaintiff’s cell on Plaintiff’s arms with extreme pressure. Plaintiff was 4 hospitalized due to pain, a blood clot and severe nerve damage. This claim of excessive force is 5 sufficient to proceed. 6 CONCLUSION 7 The Court orders that the Defendant Correctional Officer Ragasa be served electronically 8 at Correctional Training Facility. 9 Service on the listed Defendant will be effected via the California Department of 10 Corrections and Rehabilitation’s (CDCR) e-service program for civil rights cases from prisoners 11 in CDCR custody. In accordance with the program, the Clerk is directed to serve on CDCR via 12 email the following documents: the operative complaint (dkt. 1), this order of service, the notice of 13 assignment of prisoner case to a United States magistrate judge and accompanying magistrate 14 judge jurisdiction consent or declination to consent form, a CDCR Report of E-Service Waiver 15 form and a summons. The Clerk is also requested to serve a copy of this order on the plaintiff. 16 No later than 40 days after service of this order via email on CDCR, CDCR shall provide 17 the Court a completed CDCR Report of E-Service Waiver advising the Court which Defendants 18 listed in this order will be waiving service of process without the need for service by the United 19 States Marshal Service (USMS) and which Defendants decline to waive service or could not be 20 reached. CDCR also shall provide a copy of the CDCR Report of E-Service Waiver and of the 21 notice of assignment of prisoner case to a magistrate judge and accompanying magistrate judge 22 jurisdiction consent or declination to consent form to the California Attorney General’s Office, 23 which, within 21 days, shall file with the Court a waiver of service of process for the Defendants 24 who are waiving service and, within 28 days thereafter, shall file a magistrate judge jurisdiction 25 consent or declination to consent form as to the defendants who waived service. 26 Upon receipt of the CDCR Report of E-Service Waiver, the Clerk is requested to prepare 27 for each defendant who has not waived service according to the CDCR Report of E-Service 1 and copies of this order, the summons and the operative complaint for service upon each defendant 2 who has not waived service. The Clerk will also provide to the USMS a copy of the CDCR Report 3 of E-Service Waiver. 4 In order to expedite the resolution of this case, the Court orders as follows: 5 No later than sixty days from the date of service, Defendant shall file their motion for 6 summary judgment or other dispositive motion. The motion shall be supported by adequate factual 7 documentation and shall conform in all respects to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 and shall 8 include as exhibits all records and incident reports stemming from the events at issue. If Defendant 9 is of the opinion that this case cannot be resolved by such a motion, they shall so inform the Court 10 prior to the date that such motion is due. Moreover, all papers filed with the Court shall be 11 promptly served on Plaintiff. 12 At the time the dispositive motion is served, Defendant shall also serve, on a separate 13 paper, the appropriate notice or notices required by Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952, 953-954 (9th 14 Cir. 1998) (en banc), and Wyatt v. Terhune, 315 F.3d 1108, 1120 n. 4 (9th Cir. 2003); see Woods 15 v. Carey, 684 F.3d 934, 940-941 (9th Cir. 2012) (finding that Rand and Wyatt notices must be 16 given at the time motions for summary judgment or motion to dismiss for non-exhaustion are 17 filed, not earlier); Rand, 154 F.3d at 960 (establishing the separate paper requirement). 18 Plaintiff’s opposition to the dispositive motion, if any, shall be filed with the Court and 19 served upon Defendant no later than thirty days from the date the motion is served upon him. 20 Additionally, Plaintiff must read the attached page headed “NOTICE – WARNING,” which is 21 provided to him pursuant to Rand, 154 F.3d at 953-954, and Klingele v. Eikenberry, 849 F.2d 409, 22 411-12 (9th Cir. 1988). 23 If Defendant files a motion for summary judgment claiming that Plaintiff failed to exhaust 24 his available administrative remedies as required by 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a), Plaintiff should take 25 note of the attached page headed “NOTICE – WARNING (EXHAUSTION),” which is provided 26 to him as required by Wyatt, 315 F.3d at 1120 n. 4. 27 If Defendant wishes to file a reply brief, they shall do so no later than fifteen days after the 1 No hearing will be held on the motion unless the Court so orders at a later date. All 2 communications by Plaintiff with the Court must be served on Defendant, or Defendant’s counsel, 3 if and when counsel has been designated, by mailing a true copy of the document to Defendant or 4 || Defendant’s counsel. 5 Discovery may be taken in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. No 6 || further Court order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(a)(2) is required before the parties 7 may conduct discovery. 8 Finally, it is Plaintiff's responsibility to prosecute this case. Plaintiff must keep the Court 9 || informed of any change of address by filing a separate paper with the clerk headed “Notice of 10 || Change of Address.” He also must comply with the Court’s orders in a timely fashion. Failure to 11 do so may result in the dismissal of this action for failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of 12 Civil Procedure 41(b). 13 IT IS SO ORDERED. 14 |] Dated: January 18, 2024 Mt Z 2 16 5 BERT M. ILLMAN nited States Magistrate Judge 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 2 NOTICE -- WARNING (SUMMARY JUDGMENT) 3 If defendants move for summary judgment, they are seeking to have your case dismissed. 4 A motion for summary judgment under Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure will, if 5 granted, end your case. 6 Rule 56 tells you what you must do in order to oppose a motion for summary judgment. 7 Generally, summary judgment must be granted when there is no genuine issue of material fact-- 8 that is, if there is no real dispute about any fact that would affect the result of your case, the party 9 who asked for summary judgment is entitled to judgment as a matter of law, which will end your 10 case. When a party you are suing makes a motion for summary judgment that is properly 11 supported by declarations (or other sworn testimony), you cannot simply rely on what your 12 complaint says. Instead, you must set out specific facts in declarations, depositions, answers to 13 interrogatories, or authenticated documents, as provided in Rule 56(e), that contradict the facts 14 shown in the defendant’s declarations and documents and show that there is a genuine issue of 15 material fact for trial. If you do not submit your own evidence in opposition, summary judgment, 16 if appropriate, may be entered against you. If summary judgment is granted, your case will be 17 dismissed and there will be no trial. 18 NOTICE -- WARNING (EXHAUSTION) 19 If defendants file a motion for summary judgment for failure to exhaust, they are seeking 20 to have your case dismissed. If the motion is granted it will end your case. You have the right to 21 present any evidence you may have which tends to show that you did exhaust your administrative 22 remedies. Such evidence may be in the form of declarations (statements signed under penalty of 23 perjury) or authenticated documents, that is, documents accompanied by a declaration showing 24 where they came from and why they are authentic, or other sworn papers, such as answers to 25 interrogatories or depositions. If defendants file a motion for summary judgment for failure to 26 exhaust and it is granted, your case will be dismissed and there will be no trial. 27