Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-00862/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-00862-5/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Will Baptista
Defendant
Lenzo Seamster
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

LENZO SEAMSTER,

Plaintiff,

v.

WILL BAPTISTA,

Defendant.

Case No. 14-cv-00862-VC (PR)

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR 

PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT 

FOR FAILURE TO EXHAUST

Re: Dkt. No. 29

The motion for partial summary judgment based on Seamster's alleged failure to exhaust 

his administrative remedies is denied. At every level, prison officials appeared to misunderstand 

Seamster's appeal. They rejected his first-level appeal on the ground that he'd requested removal 

of two different prison officials based on two different events, even though he only requested the 

removal of Baptista, the official that Seamster alleges retaliated against him for the exercise of his 

First Amendment rights. They rejected his second-level appeal on the ground that he'd raised two 

separate issues, even though he only raised one issue (while seeking two separate but related 

remedies). They rejected his third-level appeal on the ground that his second-level appeal had 

been cancelled, but as just discussed, that cancellation was improper. Under these circumstances, 

the defendant is not entitled to summary judgment for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. 

See Albino v. Baca, 747 F.3d 1162, 1172 (9th Cir. 2014); Sapp v. Kimbrell, 623 F.3d 813, 822-24 

(9th Cir. 2010); Cal. Code Regs. tit. 15, §§ 3084.5(b)(3); 3084.6(a)(1) and (2). 

If Baptista wishes to file a dispositive motion on the merits of Seamster's claims, he must 

do so within twenty-eight days of the date of this order. Seamster’s opposition is due twenty-eight 

days after Baptista files his motion. Baptista shall file his reply within fourteen days thereafter. If 

Baptista is of the opinion that this case cannot be resolved by summary judgment, he shall inform 

the court of this before the date the summary judgment motion is due. 

Baptista shall submit with his motion the notice set forth in Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 

Case 3:14-cv-00862-VC Document 38 Filed 09/08/15 Page 1 of 3
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

952, 962-63 (9th Cir. 1998), informing Seamster how to oppose a summary judgment motion.

This Order terminates docket number 29.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 8, 2015

______________________________________

VINCE CHHABRIA

United States District Judge

Case 3:14-cv-00862-VC Document 38 Filed 09/08/15 Page 2 of 3
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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LENZO SEAMSTER,

Plaintiff,

v.

WILL BAPTISTA,

Defendant.

Case No. 14-cv-00862-VC 

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 September 8, 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.

Lenzo Seamster ID: H-64914

CHCF AIA-121

PO Box 31960

Stockton, CA 95213 

Dated: September 8, 2015

Susan Y. Soong

Clerk, United States District Court

By:________________________

Kristen Melen, Deputy Clerk to the 

Honorable VINCE CHHABRIA

Case 3:14-cv-00862-VC Document 38 Filed 09/08/15 Page 3 of 3