Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-04456/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-04456-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RICHARD L. ARNOLD, 

Plaintiff,

v.

BRAD SMITH; et al.,

Defendants.

___________________________________/

No. C-13-4456 EMC (pr)

ORDER RE SERVICE OF PROCESS

Plaintiff, an inmate at San Quentin State Prison, filed this pro se civil rights action. The

Court found that the amended complaint stated a claim against four defendants and ordered plaintiff,

who is not proceeding in forma pauperis, to serve process on them. See Docket # 14 and # 17. 

Plaintiff has filed a motion for service in which he requests the Court to order the U.S. Marshal to

serve process on the defendants. Docket # 18. Plaintiff reports that he has sent a check for $50.00

for such service of process. Docket # 22. A Marshal’s representative has informed Court staff that

the Marshal received a $50.00 check for the service in this action and needs only an order from the

court to attempt service of process. Upon due consideration, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion

for the Court to order the Marshal to attempt service of process on the defendants. Docket # 18. 

1. The clerk shall issue a summons for each of the four defendants: Joe Dobie, Philip

Earley, Gary Loredo and Jeremy Young. The clerk then will send to the U.S. Marshal for service on

each of the four defendants the following: the summons, a copy of the amended complaint (Docket #

12), and a copy of the orders at Docket # 6, # 9, # 11, # 14, and # 17, as well as this order. 

Case 3:13-cv-04456-EMC Document 23 Filed 05/13/15 Page 1 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

2. Upon receipt of the materials described in the preceding paragraph, the U.S. Marshal

shall attempt service of process on the four defendants, all of whom apparently work at San Quentin

State Prison in the Prison Industries Authority. 

 3. In order to expedite the resolution of this case, the following briefing schedule for

dispositive motions is set:

a. No later than July 24, 2015, Defendants must file and serve a motion for

summary judgment or other dispositive motion. If Defendants are of the opinion that this case

cannot be resolved by summary judgment, Defendants must so inform the Court prior to the date the

motion is due. If Defendants file a motion for summary judgment, Defendants must provide to

Plaintiff a new Rand notice regarding summary judgment procedures at the time they file such a

motion. See Woods v. Carey, 684 F.3d 934, 939 (9th Cir. 2012). 

 b. Plaintiff’s opposition to the summary judgment or other dispositive motion

must be filed with the Court and served upon Defendants no later than August 21, 2015. Plaintiff

must bear in mind the notice and warnings regarding summary judgment provided later in this order

as he prepares his opposition to any motion for summary judgment. 

c. If Defendants wish to file a reply brief, the reply brief must be filed and

served no later than September 4, 2015.

4. Plaintiff is provided the following notices and warnings about the procedures for

motions for summary judgment:

The defendants may make a motion for summary judgment by which

they seek to have your case dismissed. 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 contradict the facts shown in the defendants’ 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

Case 3:13-cv-04456-EMC Document 23 Filed 05/13/15 Page 2 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

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). 

If a defendant files a motion for summary judgment for failure to exhaust administrative remedies,

he is seeking to have the case dismissed. As with other defense summary judgment motions, if a

motion for summary judgment for failure to exhaust administrative remedies is granted, the

plaintiff’s case will be dismissed and there will be no trial. 

5. All communications by Plaintiff with the Court must be served on a defendant’s

counsel by mailing a true copy of the document to the defendant’s counsel. The Court may

disregard any document which a party files but fails to send a copy of to his opponent. Until a

defendant’s counsel has been designated, Plaintiff may mail a true copy of the document directly to

the defendant, but once a defendant is represented by counsel, all documents must be mailed to

counsel rather than directly to that defendant. 

6. Discovery may be taken in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. No

further court order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(a)(2) or Local Rule 16 is required

before the parties may conduct discovery.

7. Plaintiff is responsible for prosecuting this case. Plaintiff must promptly keep the

Court 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 for failure to prosecute pursuant

to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). Plaintiff must file a notice of change of address in every

pending case every time he is moved to a new facility.

8. Plaintiff is cautioned that he must include the case name and case number for this

case on any document he submits to the Court for consideration in this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 13, 2015

_________________________

EDWARD M. CHEN

United States District Judge

Case 3:13-cv-04456-EMC Document 23 Filed 05/13/15 Page 3 of 3