Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_12-cv-05933/USCOURTS-cand-3_12-cv-05933-8/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

RAYMOND A. GREEN, E68189,

Plaintiff,

 vs.

T. TAYLOR, et al., 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 12-5933 CRB (PR)

ORDER REFERRING PLAINTIFF

TO FEDERAL PRO BONO

PROJECT 

Plaintiff, a prisoner at High Desert State Prison (HDSP), filed a pro se

First Amended Complaint (FAC) for damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging

that on February 10, 2012, while he was at the Correctional Training Facility

(CTF) in Soledad, California, he was subjected to excessive force and subsequent

denial of medical treatment. Plaintiff specifically alleges that he was “jumped,”

“hog-tied” and “tortured” by CTF correctional officers Taylor, Aguirre, Holguin,

Henderson, Moore, Benedetti, Esparza and Espinoza, FAC (dkt. #7) at 5, and

denied medical care for the injuries he sustained despite asking Dr. Sullivan and

members of his classification review committee (Spearman, White and

Wingfield) for help, id. at 10-11.

Per order filed on June 13, 2013, the court found that, liberally construed,

the allegations in the FAC appeared to state cognizable claims under § 1983 for

use of excessive force and for deliberate indifference to serious medical needs

and ordered the FAC served on defendants. After an unsuccessful motion to

dismiss, defendants moved for summary judgment.

Case 3:12-cv-05933-JSC Document 67 Filed 04/20/15 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

Per order filed November 26, 2014, the court granted in part and denied in

part defendants’ motion for summary judgment: 

As to plaintiff’s claim of excessive force, summary judgment is

appropriate as to correctional officer Taylor but not appropriate as

to responding correctional officers Aguirre, Holguin, Henderson,

More, Benedetti, Esparza or Espinoza. As to plaintiff’s claim of

deliberate indifference to serious medical needs, summary

judgment is appropriate as to Dr. Sullivan and as to ICC members

Spearman, White and Wingfield.

Nov. 26, 2014 Order (dkt. #57) at 13-14. The court then referred the matter to

Magistrate Judge Vadas for settlement proceedings, but Judge Vadas recently

reported that the case did not settle. 

Plaintiff having requested and being in need of counsel to assist him in

this matter, and good and just cause appearing, this matter is referred to the

Federal Pro Bono Project to find him volunteer counsel, if possible.

(1) The clerk shall forward to the Federal Pro Bono Project: (a) a copy of

this order, (b) a copy of the docket sheet, and (c) a copy of the operative

complaint and relevant court orders.

(2) Upon an attorney being located to represent plaintiff, that attorney

shall be appointed as counsel for plaintiff in this matter until further order of the

court.

(3) All proceedings in this action are stayed until four weeks from the date

an attorney is appointed to represent plaintiff in this action.

SO ORDERED.

DATED: April 16, 2015 

CHARLES R. BREYER

United States District Judge 

G:\PRO-SE\CRB\CR.12\Green, R.12-5933.msj.referral.wpd

Case 3:12-cv-05933-JSC Document 67 Filed 04/20/15 Page 2 of 2