Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_18-cv-00998/USCOURTS-cand-3_18-cv-00998-0/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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL L. ARENDT,

Plaintiff,

v.

SCOTT KERNAN,

Defendant.

Case No. 18-cv-00998-RS (PR) 

ORDER OF SERVICE;

ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANT 

TO FILE A DISPOSITIVE MOTION 

OR NOTICE REGARDING SUCH 

MOTION; 

INSTRUCTIONS TO CLERK

INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff alleges in this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 suit that his jailors and the Governor have 

violated his due process rights by failing to adhere to the terms of the law created by 

Proposition 57. When liberally construed, plaintiff has stated claims for relief against 

defendant Kernan only. 

Defendant is directed to file a dispositive motion or notice regarding such motion 

relative to the claims raised in the complaint or before August 27, 2018. The Court further 

directs defendant to adhere to the notice provisions detailed in Sections 2.a and 10 of the 

conclusion of this order. 

Case 3:18-cv-00998-RS Document 6 Filed 05/23/18 Page 1 of 5
ORDER OF SERVICE

CASE NO. 18-cv-00998-RS

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

DISCUSSION

A. Standard of Review

A federal court must conduct a preliminary screening in any case in which a 

prisoner seeks redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a 

governmental entity. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). In its review, a court must identify any 

cognizable claims and dismiss any claims that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim 

upon which relief may be granted or seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune 

from such relief. See id. § 1915A(b)(1), (2). Pro se pleadings must be liberally construed. 

See Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep’t, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1988). 

A “complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a 

claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) 

(quoting Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). “A claim has facial 

plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the 

reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.” Id. (quoting 

Twombly, 550 U.S. at 556). Furthermore, a court “is not required to accept legal 

conclusions cast in the form of factual allegations if those conclusions cannot reasonably 

be drawn from the facts alleged.” Clegg v. Cult Awareness Network, 18 F.3d 752, 754–55 

(9th Cir. 1994). To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two 

essential elements: (1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States 

was violated, and (2) that the alleged violation was committed by a person acting under the 

color of state law. See West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988). 

B. Legal Claims 

Plaintiff alleges that (i) the Governor; (ii) Scott Kernan, the Secretary of the 

California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (“CDCR”); and (iii) the CDCR 

have violated his due process rights by failing to properly implement the provisions of 

Proposition 57. When liberally construed, plaintiff has stated a due process claim against 

Kernan, who issued the regulations that allegedly resulted in the mismatch between 

Case 3:18-cv-00998-RS Document 6 Filed 05/23/18 Page 2 of 5
ORDER OF SERVICE

CASE NO. 18-cv-00998-RS

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

plaintiff’s parole consideration date and his earliest possible release date. 

His claims against Governor Brown are DISMISSED. He alleges Brown 

committed fraud, oppression, and false advertisement in his public statements about the 

implementation of Proposition 57. Whatever the merits of these claims, they are state law 

claims, which are not actionable under section 1983. Furthermore, plaintiff fails to allege 

facts connecting Brown to the implementation of regulations that resulted in an alleged due 

process violation. Plaintiff’s claims against the CDCR are DISMISSED as duplicative of 

his claims against its Secretary, defendant Kernan. 

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, the Court orders as follows: 

1. The Clerk of the Court shall issue summons and the United States Marshal 

shall serve, without prepayment of fees, a copy of the operative complaint in this matter 

(Dkt. No. 1), all attachments thereto, and a copy of this order upon Scott Kernan at the 

CDCR. The Clerk shall also mail courtesy copies of the complaint and this order to the 

California Attorney General’s Office.

2. On or before August 27, 2018, defendant shall file a motion for summary 

judgment or other dispositive motion with respect to the claim(s) in the complaint found to 

be cognizable above. 

a. If defendant elects to file a motion to dismiss on the grounds plaintiff 

failed to exhaust his available administrative remedies as required by 42 U.S.C. 

§ 1997e(a), defendant shall do so in a motion for summary judgment, as required by 

Albino v. Baca, 747 F.3d 1162 (9th Cir. 2014).

b. Any motion for summary judgment shall be supported by adequate 

factual documentation and shall conform in all respects to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of 

Civil Procedure. Defendant is advised that summary judgment cannot be granted, nor 

qualified immunity found, if material facts are in dispute. If any defendant is of the 

opinion that this case cannot be resolved by summary judgment, he shall so inform the 

Case 3:18-cv-00998-RS Document 6 Filed 05/23/18 Page 3 of 5
ORDER OF SERVICE

CASE NO. 18-cv-00998-RS

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

Court prior to the date the summary judgment motion is due. 

3. Plaintiff’s opposition to the dispositive motion shall be filed with the Court 

and served on defendant no later than forty-five (45) days from the date defendant’s 

motion is filed. 

4. Defendant shall file a reply brief no later than fifteen (15) days after

plaintiff’s opposition is filed. 

5. The motion shall be deemed submitted as of the date the reply brief is due. 

No hearing will be held on the motion unless the Court so orders at a later date. 

6. All communications by the plaintiff with the Court must be served on 

defendant, or defendant’s counsel once counsel has been designated, by mailing a true 

copy of the document to defendant or defendant’s counsel.

7. 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 16-1 is required before the parties may conduct discovery.

8. It is plaintiff’s responsibility to prosecute this case. Plaintiff must 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).

9. Extensions of time must be filed no later than the deadline sought to be 

extended and must be accompanied by a showing of good cause.

10. A decision from the Ninth Circuit requires that pro se prisoner-plaintiffs be 

given “notice of what is required of them in order to oppose” summary judgment motions 

at the time of filing of the motions, rather than when the court orders service of process or 

otherwise before the motions are filed. Woods v. Carey, 684 F.3d 934, 939-41 (9th Cir. 

2012). Defendant shall provide the following notice to plaintiff when he files and serves 

any motion for summary judgment: 

Case 3:18-cv-00998-RS Document 6 Filed 05/23/18 Page 4 of 5
ORDER OF SERVICE

CASE NO. 18-cv-00998-RS

5

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

The defendants have made 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 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, 962-963 (9th Cir. 1998). 

11. Governor Brown and the CDCR are TERMINATED as defendants in this 

action, and the claims against them are DISMISSED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May ___, 2018

_________________________

 RICHARD SEEBORG

 United States District Judge

22

Case 3:18-cv-00998-RS Document 6 Filed 05/23/18 Page 5 of 5