Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_13-cv-01883/USCOURTS-caed-2_13-cv-01883-4/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 

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

KEVIN ANTHONY MACGREGOR, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

DR. DIAL, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:13-cv-1883 LKK AC P 

ORDER 

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, seeks relief pursuant to 42 U.S. § 1983. On 

March 12, 2014, defendants brought a motion to dismiss plaintiff’s first amended complaint for 

failure to exhaust administrative remedies, pursuant to non-enumerated Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b), and 

for failure to state a claim, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). ECF No. 36. Currently pending 

before the court is plaintiff’s motion for an extension of time to file an opposition to the motion, 

unopposed by defendants. ECF Nos. 40, 41. Plaintiff filed a duplicative motion on April 18, 

2014, which the court construes as an amended motion because he filed it to correct his 

misdesignation of his “declaration” as a “proof of service” in the first motion. See ECF No. 42 at 

10. 

 On April 3, 2014, the Ninth Circuit overruled Wyatt v. Terhune, 315 F.3d 1108, 1119 (9th 

Cir. 2003) and held that the defense of failure to exhaust administrative remedies under 42 U.S.C. 

Case 2:13-cv-01883-JAM-AC Document 43 Filed 04/22/14 Page 1 of 4
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

§ 1997e(a) should in most cases be presented in a motion for summary judgment rather than a 

motion to dismiss under unenumerated Rule 12(b). Albino v. Baca, No. 10-55702, 2014 WL 

1317141 (9th Cir. Apr. 3, 2014) (en banc). Because defendants have moved for dismissal of the 

amended complaint as administratively unexhausted pursuant to Rule 12(b), and have not 

complied with the requirements of Rule 56, the court will vacate the motion and direct the 

defendants to file within fourteen (14) days a motion that complies with Albino. The portion of 

defendants’ motion that asserts failure to state a claim, and does not involve administrative 

exhaustion, may be refiled as a separate motion or in combination with a motion for summary 

judgment pursuant to Rule 56 regarding plaintiff’s alleged failure to exhaust. 

 In plaintiff’s motion for an extension of time to file an opposition to the motion to 

dismiss, which will now be denied as moot, plaintiff also asks the court to provide a copy of 

defendants’ motion to dismiss and to order that defendants be required to serve documents upon 

him by certified mail only. The basis for this request is plaintiff’s averment that he never 

received the March 12, 2014 motion to dismiss and that he has not received his mail in this case 

on two prior occasions. ECF Nos. 40, 42 at 3. Plaintiff asserts that he has “warned” the court in 

previous filings of problems with receiving his mail. However, defendants have since re-served 

their motion (which, in any event, is now vacated). Moreover, the court notes that the two other 

documents that plaintiff claims not to have received by mail were orders from the court, not 

documents served by defendants. 

 Plaintiff relies on Younger v. Gilmore, 404 U.S. 15 (1971) (per curiam), which affirmed 

Gilmore v. Lynch, 319 F. Supp. 105 (N.D. Cal. 1970) (per curiam). ECF Nos. 40, 42 at 3. In 

Gilmore, state officials were enjoined from enforcing a prison regulation which was found to be 

overly restrictive of the codes and references in prison libraries made available to inmates. 

As defendants point out, plaintiff does not cite any authority which speaks to his specific request 

that defendants be compelled to serve him via certified mail. ECF No. 41 at 2. Defendants are 

correct that not only would such a requirement complicate service and increase its cost, the Local 

Rules do not authorize such a procedure. Id. In addition, it would hardly be equitable to require 

defendants to effect service via certified mail when the two earlier instances of which plaintiff 

Case 2:13-cv-01883-JAM-AC Document 43 Filed 04/22/14 Page 2 of 4
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

complains involved mail issued from the court. The request for defendants to be required to serve 

plaintiff only by certified mail will be denied. 

Plaintiff also requests appointment of counsel. The United States Supreme Court has 

ruled that district courts lack authority to require counsel to represent indigent prisoners in § 1983 

cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In certain exceptional 

circumstances, the district court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to 28 

U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991); Wood v. 

Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th Cir. 1990). 

The test for exceptional circumstances requires the court to “consider ‘the likelihood of 

success on the merits as well as the ability of the petitioner to articulate his claims pro se in light 

of the complexity of the legal issues involved.’” Palmer v. Valdez, 560 F.3d 965, 970 (9th Cir. 

2009) (quoting Weygandt v. Look, 718 F.2d 952, 954 (9th Cir. 1983). Neither of these 

considerations is dispositive and instead must be viewed together.” Id. (citing Wilborn v. 

Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 1331 (9th Cir. 1986)). The motion to dismiss has been vacated and 

the court is unable at this time to evaluate plaintiff’s likelihood of success on the merits. Plaintiff 

has been able to articulate his claim of deliberate indifference by defendants in the treatment of 

his hernia and that claim appears to be relatively straightforward. Circumstances common to 

most prisoners, such as lack of legal education and limited law library access, do not establish 

exceptional circumstances that would warrant a request for voluntary assistance of counsel. 

Plaintiff’s claim (ECF Nos. 40, 42 at 4) that he suffers from serious medical conditions, will be 

needing surgery and is being administered pain medication claim (ECF Nos. 40, 42 at 4) does not 

suffice to meet his burden to show the requisite exceptional circumstances. See Palmer, 560 F.3d 

at 970 (court did not abuse discretion in denying requests for appointment of counsel where 

plaintiff contended, inter alia, that pain from surgery limited his trial preparation ability). Thus, 

the request(s) for appointment of counsel will be denied. 

 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that: 

 1. Defendants motion to dismiss the first amended complaint (ECF No. 36) is vacated; 

 2. Defendants may, within fourteen days, bring a motion for summary judgment pursuant 

Case 2:13-cv-01883-JAM-AC Document 43 Filed 04/22/14 Page 3 of 4
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

to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 on the issue of administrative exhaustion. In doing so, defendants must 

provide plaintiff with the notice required under Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952, 957 (9th Cir. 

1998) (en banc); 

3. Defendants may, within fourteen days, re-file that portion of the vacated motion 

brought pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) in a separate motion or in combination with any motion for 

summary judgment regarding the exhaustion of administrative remedies. 

4. Plaintiff’s motion for an extension of time to file an opposition (ECF No. 40) to the 

now-vacated motion is denied as moot. 

5. Plaintiff’s motions for the court to order that defendants be required to serve him by 

certified mail only (ECF Nos. 40, 42) are denied. 

6. Plaintiff’s motions for the appointment of counsel (ECF Nos. 40, 42) are denied. 

DATED: April 22, 2014 

Case 2:13-cv-01883-JAM-AC Document 43 Filed 04/22/14 Page 4 of 4