Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_11-cv-00414/USCOURTS-caed-2_11-cv-00414-17/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LINNIE STAGGS, as administrator of 

the ESTATE OF ROBERT E. 

STAGGS, deceased, and MELISSA 

STAGGS,

Plaintiffs,

v.

DOCTOR’S HOSPITAL OF 

MANTECA, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:11-cv-00414-MCE-KJN

ORDER

On April 26, 2013, this Court dismissed the only two federal claims for relief in the 

operative complaint, declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ statelaw claims, and directed the Clerk of the Court to close this action. The Ninth Circuit 

subsequently reversed and remanded. See ECF Nos. 94, 95. The Ninth Circuit found 

that this Court erred in dismissing Plaintiffs’ first claim for relief, a claim under 42 U.S.C. 

§ 1983, because Plaintiffs had “alleged sufficient facts to state a claim that the prison 

defendants were deliberately indifferent to Robert Staggs’ medical needs.” ECF No. 94 

at 2.1 The remand included instructions for this Court to reconsider exercising

supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ state-law claims. 

 1

 The Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of Plaintiffs’ other federal claim. ECF No. 94 at 2-3. 

Case 2:11-cv-00414-DJC-CSK Document 97 Filed 09/03/15 Page 1 of 2
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

In light of the Ninth Circuit’s remand, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Clerk of the Court is directed to re-open this action.

2. The Court’s April 26, 2013 Order (ECF No. 88) is VACATED in its entirety, 

except with regard to the dismissal of Plaintiffs’ fifth cause of action, which remains 

DISMISSED with prejudice. 

3. This action will proceed on Plaintiffs’ Third Amended Complaint (ECF No. 84). 

4. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a), this Court has and will exercise supplemental 

jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ state-law claims. 

5. Given the passage of time, however, Defendants Sattah, Russin, and Owen’s 

Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 72) and Defendant Doctors Hospital of Manteca, Inc.’s 

Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 74)—both of which were denied as moot by way of the 

Court’s April 26, 2013 Order—are hereby DENIED without prejudice to refiling now. 

6. Not later than thirty (30) days following the date this Order is electronically 

filed, the parties are directed to file a Joint Status Report with the Court. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 2, 2015

Case 2:11-cv-00414-DJC-CSK Document 97 Filed 09/03/15 Page 2 of 2