Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-04684/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-04684-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JUAN ANGEL MARTINEZ, JR., 

Plaintiff(s),

 v.

JAMES E. TILTON, et al.,

Defendant(s). 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 07-4684 CRB (PR)

ORDER OF SERVICE

Plaintiff, a prisoner at Pelican Bay State Prison ("PBSP"), has filed a pro

se civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 28 U.S.C. § 1367 alleging

unjustified interference with his incoming mail based on alleged prison and street

gang association. Plaintiff claims that the repeated denial, censoring and

defacement of his mail on the basis of erroneous and unreliable information has

amounted to violations of his federal and state constitutional rights. 

DISCUSSION

A. Standard of Review

Federal courts must engage in a preliminary screening of cases in which

prisoners seek redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a

governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The court must identify cognizable

Case 3:07-cv-04684-CRB Document 8 Filed 01/11/08 Page 1 of 5
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 2

claims or dismiss the complaint, or any portion of the complaint, if the complaint

"is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be

granted," or "seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such

relief." Id. § 1915A(b). Pro se pleadings must be liberally construed, however. 

Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep't, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1990).

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two

essential elements: (1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the

United States was violated, and (2) that the alleged violation was committed by a

person acting under the color of state law. West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48

(1988).

B. Legal Claims

Prisoners enjoy a First Amendment right to send and receive mail. See

Witherow v. Paff, 52 F.3d 264, 265 (9th Cir. 1995) (citing Thornburgh v. Abbott,

490 U.S. 401, 407 (1989)). A prison may nonetheless adopt regulations or

practices which impinge on a prisoner's First Amendment rights as long as the

regulations or practices are "reasonably related to legitimate penological

interests." Turner v. Safley, 482 U.S. 78, 89 (1987). 

Prisoners also have a liberty interest in the receipt of mail, which triggers

procedural due process guarantees. Krug v. Lutz, 329 F.3d 692, 696-967 (9th

Cir. 2003). If prison officials withhold mail, a prisoner has due process right to

receive notice that his incoming mail is being withheld. See Frost v. Symington,

197 F.3d 348, 353-54 (9th Cir. 1999); see also Prison Legal News v. Cook, 238

F.3d 1145, 1152-53 (9th Cir. 2001) (holding that due process rights apply to

withheld mail where prisoners had constitutionally protected right to receive the

mail). He also has the due process right to appeal the exclusion of mail to a

prison official other than the one who made the initial exclusion decision. See

Case 3:07-cv-04684-CRB Document 8 Filed 01/11/08 Page 2 of 5
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 3

Krug, 329 F.3d at 697-98 & n.5 (holding that due process safeguards of Martinez,

and not Turner reasonableness standard, apply to withholding delivery of

incoming publications, and prison’s policy of not providing two-level review

violates prisoner’s procedural due process rights).

Liberally construed, plaintiff's allegations state cognizable claims of 

violation of his First Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment rights under the

federal constitution, and analogous guarantees under the California constitution,

and will be served on the named defendants. Plaintiff's claim of violation of his

Eighth Amendment rights is dismissed, however. Interference with incoming

mail based on alleged prison and street gang association cannot be said to

constitute cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment. Cf.

Hoptowit v. Ray, 682 F.2d 1237, 1255-56 (9th Cir. 1982) (misclassification does

not inflict pain so as to constitute cruel and unusual punishment violative of 8th

Amendment).

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons and for good cause shown,

1. The clerk shall issue summons and the United States Marshal shall

serve, without prepayment of fees, copies of the complaint in this matter, all

attachments thereto, and copies of this order on the named defendants. The clerk

also shall serve a copy of this order on plaintiff.

2. In order to expedite the resolution of this case, the court orders as

follows:

a. No later than 90 days from the date of this order, defendants

shall file a motion for summary judgment or other dispositive motion. A motion

for summary judgment shall be supported by adequate factual documentation and

shall conform in all respects to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56, and shall

Case 3:07-cv-04684-CRB Document 8 Filed 01/11/08 Page 3 of 5
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 4

include as exhibits all records and incident reports stemming from the events at

issue. If defendants are of the opinion that this case cannot be resolved by

summary judgment or other dispositive motion, they shall so inform the court

prior to the date their motion is due. All papers filed with the court shall be

served promptly on plaintiff.

b. Plaintiff's opposition to the dispositive motion shall be filed

with the court and served upon defendants no later than 30 days after defendants

serve plaintiff with the motion. 

c. Plaintiff is advised that a motion for summary judgment

under Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure will, if granted, end your

case. Rule 56 tells you what you must do in order to oppose a motion for

summary judgment. Generally, summary judgment must be granted when there

is no genuine issue of material fact--that is, if there is no real dispute about any

fact that would affect the result of your case, the party who asked for summary

judgment is entitled to judgment as a matter of law, which will end your case. 

When a party you are suing makes a motion for summary judgment that is

properly supported by declarations (or other sworn testimony), you cannot simply

rely on what your complaint says. Instead, you must set out specific facts in

declarations, depositions, answers to interrogatories, or authenticated documents,

as provided in Rule 56(e), that contradicts the facts shown in the defendant's

declarations and documents and show that there is a genuine issue of material

fact for trial. If you do not submit your own evidence in opposition, summary

judgment, if appropriate, may be entered against you. If summary judgment is

granted, your case will be dismissed and there will be no trial. Rand v. Rowland,

154 F.3d 952, 962-63 (9th Cir. 1998) (en banc) (App A).

/

Case 3:07-cv-04684-CRB Document 8 Filed 01/11/08 Page 4 of 5
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 G:\PRO-SE\CRB\CR.07\Martinez, J1.or1.wpd 5

Plaintiff is also advised that a motion to dismiss for failure to exhaust

administrative remedies under 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a) will, if granted, end your

case, albeit without prejudice. You must “develop a record” and present it in

your opposition in order to dispute any “factual record” presented by the

defendants in their motion to dismiss. Wyatt v. Terhune, 315 F.3d 1108, 1120

n.14 (9th Cir. 2003).

d. Defendants shall file a reply brief within 15 days of the date

on which plaintiff serves them with the opposition. 

e. The motion shall be deemed submitted as of the date the

reply brief is due. No hearing will be held on the motion unless the court so

orders at a later date. 

3. Discovery may be taken in accordance with the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure. No further court order is required before the parties may

conduct discovery.

4. All communications by plaintiff with the court must be served on

defendants, or defendants' counsel once counsel has been designated, by mailing

a true copy of the document to defendants or defendants' counsel.

5. It is plaintiff's responsibility to prosecute this case. Plaintiff must

keep the court and all parties informed of any change of address and must comply

with the court's orders in a timely fashion. Failure to do so may result in the

dismissal of this action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

SO ORDERED.

DATED: January 11, 2008 

CHARLES R. BREYER

United States District Judge

Case 3:07-cv-04684-CRB Document 8 Filed 01/11/08 Page 5 of 5