Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-00194/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-00194-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
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

CHARLIE D. JACKSON, #1127769, 

Plaintiff(s),

 v.

SZMARCIARZ, Correctional Officer,

Defendant(s). 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 15-0194 CRB (PR)

ORDER GRANTING MOTION

TO STAY ACTION UNDER

THE SERVICE MEMBER

RELIEF ACT, 50 U.S.C. § 522,

AND ADMINISTRATIVELY

CLOSING CASE

(Dkt. #16)

I.

Plaintiff, a prisoner at the Northern Nevada Correctional Center in Carson

City, Nevada, filed the instant pro se action for damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983

alleging that on October 8, 2012, while he was incarcerated at San Quentin State

Prison (SQSP) in San Quentin, California, Correctional Officer Szmarciarz used

excessive force and retaliated against him when Szmarciarz ran up to plaintiff

screaming “snitch” and “rat,” and then “slammed plaintiff’s face against the bars

of [his] cell thus causing the plaintiff to split his lip open.” Dkt. #1 (Compl.) at 4. 

Per order filed on May 29, 2015, the court found that, liberally construed,

plaintiff’s allegations appear to state a cognizable § 1983 claim for use of

excessive force and an arguably cognizable § 1983 claim for retaliation, and

ordered the United States Marshal to serve Szmarciarz (defendant).

Case 3:15-cv-00194-CRB Document 23 Filed 08/27/15 Page 1 of 3
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

Defendant now moves for a stay of this action under the Service Member

Civil Relief Act (SCRA), 50 U.S.C. § 522, until 30 days after he is released from

active military service. Plaintiff has filed an opposition and defendant has filed a

reply. 

II.

SCRA provides that at any stage before final judgment in a civil action in

which a party to the action is in military service, the court shall upon application

by the service member stay the action. 50 U.S.C. § 522(b)(1). But although

subdivision (b)(1) uses the term “shall,” a stay is not mandated solely upon

finding an applicant qualifies under SCRA. Boone v. Lightner, 319 U.S. 561,

565-69 (1943). The court has the discretion to determine whether a service

member is entitled to a stay under SCRA. Id. As the Supreme Court has held,

however:

[SCRA] is always to be liberally construed to protect those who

have been obliged to drop their own affairs to take up the burdens

of the nation. The discretion that is vested in trial courts to that end

is not to be withheld on nice calculations as to whether prejudice

may result from absence, or absence result from the service. 

Absence when one’s rights or liabilities are being adjudged is

usually prima facie prejudicial.

Id. at 575.

III.

In support of his request for a stay, defendant submits the Secretary of the

Air Force’s order (Request and Authorization for Active Duty Training/Active

Duty Tour (AF Form 398)) requiring him to report for active duty on July 7, 2015

through March 2, 2016. Defendant also declares under penalty of perjury that

because he has been deployed with the Air Force for active military service in the

country of Jordan through at least March 2, 2016, he will be unable to litigate this

civil action. Specifically, he will be unable to appear in court, confer with his

Case 3:15-cv-00194-CRB Document 23 Filed 08/27/15 Page 2 of 3
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

attorney, respond to discovery or assist with the preparation of any dispositive

motions that his counsel may file on his behalf. Defendant accordingly seeks a

stay of all proceedings in this action under SCRA until 30 days after he is

released from active military service.

Good cause shown, defendant’s motion for a stay of this action under

SCRA (dkt. #16) until 30 days after he is released from active military service is

GRANTED. Plaintiff’s objection to a stay on grounds that relevant documents

and evidence may be lost is unpersuasive because defendant’s counsel “affirms

that he has taken the appropriate steps to preserve existing relevant documents

and evidence in this case.” Dkt. #21 (Reply) at 2. 

IV.

 The clerk is instructed to ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSE the case. 

Nothing further will take place in this case until defendant is released from active

military service and, within 30 days thereafter, moves to reopen the case and lift

the court’s stay under SCRA. 

Defendant is warned that failure to move to reopen the case and lift the

court’s stay within 30 days of his release from active military service will result

in sanctions.

SO ORDERED.

DATED: August 26, 2015 

CHARLES R. BREYER

United States District Judge

G:\PRO-SE\CRB\CR.15\Jackson, C.15-0194.mtn_to_stay.wpd

Case 3:15-cv-00194-CRB Document 23 Filed 08/27/15 Page 3 of 3