Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-01227/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-01227-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Z. Ahmed
Defendant
Johnny L. Small
Plaintiff

Document Text:

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

JOHNNY L. SMALL,

Plaintiff,

v.

Z. AHMED,

Defendant.

Case No. 15-cv-01227-JCS (PR) 

ORDER OF SERVICE;

ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANT 

TO FILE A DISPOSITIVE MOTION 

OR NOTICE REGARDING SUCH 

MOTION;

INSTRUCTIONS TO CLERK

INTRODUCTION

In this federal civil rights action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, plaintiff, a state 

prisoner proceeding pro se, alleges that Dr. Z. Ahmed at Soledad State Prison provided 

constitutionally inadequate medical care.1 The complaint has been reviewed by the Court 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). In response to the complaint, defendant is directed to 

file a dispositive motion or notice regarding such motion on or before October 15, 2015. 

The Court further directs that defendant is to adhere to the notice provisions detailed in 

 

1

Plaintiff consented to magistrate judge jurisdiction. (Docket No. 4.) The magistrate 

judge, then, has jurisdiction to issue this order, even though defendants have not been 

served or consented to magistrate judge jurisdiction. See Neals v. Norwood, 59 F.3d 530, 

532 (5th Cir. 1995) 

Case 3:15-cv-01227-JCS Document 5 Filed 07/20/15 Page 1 of 6
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

Sections 2.a and 10 of the conclusion of this order. 

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, the 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, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 1949 

(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 in Dr. Z. Ahmed, a physician employed at Soledad State 

Prison, provided constitutionally inadequate medical care by failing to timely diagnose and

appropriately treat his ulcerative colitis. When liberally construed, plaintiff has stated a 

claim for relief. 

Case 3:15-cv-01227-JCS Document 5 Filed 07/20/15 Page 2 of 6
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

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 

(Docket No. 1), all attachments thereto, and a copy of this order upon Z. Ahmed, a 

physician at Soledad State Prison. The Clerk shall also mail courtesy copies of the 

complaint and this order to the California Attorney General‘s Office.

2. No later than ninety (90) days from the date of this order, defendant shall file 

a motion for summary judgment or other dispositive motion with respect to the claims 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 

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. 

Case 3:15-cv-01227-JCS Document 5 Filed 07/20/15 Page 3 of 6
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

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). Defendants shall provide the following notice to plaintiff when they file 

and serves any motion for summary judgment: 

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), 

Case 3:15-cv-01227-JCS Document 5 Filed 07/20/15 Page 4 of 6
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

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, 962–63 (9th Cir. 1998). 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 20, 2015

_________________________

JOSEPH C. SPERO

 Chief Magistrate Judge

Case 3:15-cv-01227-JCS Document 5 Filed 07/20/15 Page 5 of 6
6

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

JOHNNY L. SMALL,

Plaintiff,

v.

Z. AHMED,

Defendant.

Case No. 15-cv-01227-JCS 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. 

District Court, Northern District of California.

That on July 20, 2015, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing 

said copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by 

depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery 

receptacle located in the Clerk's office.

Johnny L. Small ID: #:J-44318

Chino State Prison

P.O. Box. 500, CA2-206 Low

Chino, CA 91708 

Dated: July 20, 2015

Richard W. Wieking

Clerk, United States District Court

By:________________________

Karen Hom, Deputy Clerk to the 

Honorable JOSEPH C. SPERO

Case 3:15-cv-01227-JCS Document 5 Filed 07/20/15 Page 6 of 6