Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01180/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01180-10/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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ISRAEL MEZA,

Plaintiff,

v.

DIRECTOR OF CALIFORNIA

DEPARTMENT OF 

CORRECTIONS, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:05-cv-01180-LJO-NEW (DLB) PC

ORDER REQUIRING DEFENDANTS TO

SUBMIT FURTHER BRIEFING WITHIN

FIFTEEN DAYS REGARDING THE

REQUIREMENTS FOR INMATE APPEAL

CONTENTS

(Doc. 29)

Plaintiff Israel Meza (“plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis

in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action is proceeding on plaintiff’s

complaint, filed September 19, 2005, against defendants Avila, Barajas, and Bennett (“defendants”)

for use of excessive physical force in violation of the Eighth Amendment, based on the events that

occurred on November 8, 2004. On November 8, 2006, defendants filed a motion to dismiss for

failure to exhaust. Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b); 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a). Plaintiff filed an opposition on

March 20, 2007, and plaintiff filed a reply on March 30, 2007.

In their motion, defendants state, “In his appeal, the inmate must identify each individual

against whom he raises a grievance, specifically state each claim against these individuals, and

identify each form of relief desired. Failure to identify each individual, each claim, or the form of

relief sought results in a failure to exhaust those issues through the administrative appeal process.

These requirements are codified in the governing rules. Cal. Code Regs. tit. 15, § 3084.” (Doc. 29,

5:7-11.) A review ofsection 3084 does not support defendants’ statement. Defendants have fifteen

Case 1:05-cv-01180-OWW -LJO Document 36 Filed 04/12/07 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

days to submit further briefing, with evidence, supporting the aforementioned statement.

Misrepresentation of the law to this court will result in the imposition of sanctions.

Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that within fifteen (15) days from the

date of service of this order, defendants shall submit further briefing, with evidence, supporting the

statement made in their motion regarding the requirements for inmate appeal form contents. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: April 11, 2007 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

3b142a UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-01180-OWW -LJO Document 36 Filed 04/12/07 Page 2 of 2