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

CHRISTOPHER SHANE RIVERA,

Plaintiff,

v.

S. KERNAN, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No.17-cv-00335-JSC 

ORDER OF SERVICE

INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff, a California prisoner, filed this pro se civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. §

1983 against officials at Pelican Bay State Prison and the California Department of Corrections 

and Rehabilitation.

1

 Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis is granted in a separate 

order. For the reasons explained below, the complaint is ordered served upon Defendants. 

STANDARD OF REVIEW

Federal courts must engage in a preliminary screening of cases in which prisoners seek 

redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 

1915A(a). The Court must identify cognizable claims or dismiss the complaint, or any portion of 

the complaint, if the complaint “is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief 

may be granted,” or “seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief.” Id.

§ 1915A(b). Pro se pleadings must be liberally construed. Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep't, 901 

F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1990).

 

1

Plaintiff consented to the jurisdiction of a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 

636(c). (ECF No. 1 at 8.) 
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

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2) requires only “a short and plain statement of the 

claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” “Specific facts are not necessary; the 

statement need only give the defendant fair notice of what the . . . . claim is and the grounds upon 

which it rests.” Erickson v. Pardus, 127 S. Ct. 2197, 2200 (2007) (citations omitted). Although to 

state a claim a complaint “does not need detailed factual allegations, . . . a plaintiff’s obligation to 

provide the grounds of his entitle[ment] to relief requires more than labels and conclusions, and a 

formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do. . . . Factual allegations must 

be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level.” Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 

127 S. Ct. 1955, 1964-65 (2007) (citations omitted). A complaint must proffer “enough facts to 

state a claim for relief that is plausible on its face.” Id. at 1974. 

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two 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. West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 

42, 48 (1988).

LEGAL CLAIMS

Plaintiff’s allegations that Defendants impeded his observation of rituals essential to his 

Odinist religious beliefs, when liberally construed, state cognizable claims for the violation of his

rights under the First Amendment and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act. 

CONCLUSION

1. The Clerk shall issue a summons and Magistrate Judge jurisdiction consent form 

and the United States Marshal shall serve, without prepayment of fees, the summons, Magistrate 

Judge jurisdiction consent form, a copy of the complaint with attachments, and a copy of this 

order on Warden C. E. Ducart, T. Puget, G.W. Olson, R. Losacco, Chaplain Richards and 

Chaplain Richard McCovey at the Pelican Bay State Prison and on Scott Kernan, Appeals 

Examiner T. Lee, and Appeals Chief M. Voong at the California Department of Corrections 

and Rehabilitation. 

The Clerk shall also mail a courtesy copy of the Magistrate Judge jurisdiction consent 

form, the complaint with all attachments and a copy of this order to the California Attorney 
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

General’s Office. 

2. Defendants shall complete and file the Magistrate Judge jurisdiction consent form 

within the deadline provided on the form. He shall also file an answer in accordance with the 

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 

3. To expedite the resolution of this case:

a. No later than 91 days from the date this order is issued, Defendants shall file a 

motion for summary judgment or other dispositive motion. The motion shall be supported by 

adequate factual documentation and shall conform in all respects to Federal Rule of Civil 

Procedure 56, and shall include as exhibits all records and incident reports stemming from the 

events at issue. If Defendants is of the opinion that this case cannot be resolved by summary 

judgment, they shall so inform the Court prior to the date the summary judgment motion is due. 

All papers filed with the Court shall be promptly served on Plaintiff.

b. At the time the dispositive motion is served, Defendants shall also serve, on a 

separate paper, the appropriate notice required by Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952, 953-954 (9th 

Cir. 1998) (en banc). See Woods v. Carey, 684 F.3d 934, 940-941 (9th Cir. 2012). 

c. Plaintiff's opposition to the dispositive motion, if any, shall be filed with the 

Court and served upon Defendants no later than 28 days from the date the motion is filed. 

Plaintiff must read the attached page headed “NOTICE -- WARNING,” which is provided to him 

pursuant to Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952, 953-954 (9th Cir. 1998) (en banc).

d. Defendants shall file a reply brief no later than 14 days after the opposition is 

filed. 

e. 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. 

5. All communications by Plaintiff with the Court must be served on Defendants or 

their counsel once counsel has been designated, by mailing a true copy of the document to 

Defendants or their counsel.

6. 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) is required before the 
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

parties may conduct discovery.

7. It is Plaintiff's responsibility to prosecute this case. Plaintiff must keep the Court 

informed of any change of address by filing a separate paper with the clerk headed “Notice of 

Change of Address.” He also 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). Reasonable requests for an extension of a deadline will be allowed upon a 

showing of good cause if the request is filed prior to the deadline. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 5, 2017

JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY

United States Magistrate Judge
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

NOTICE -- WARNING (SUMMARY JUDGMENT)

If Defendants move for summary judgment, they are seeking 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 Defendant's 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.
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

CHRISTOPHER SHANE RIVERA,

Plaintiff,

v.

S. KERNAN, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 17-cv-00335-JSC 

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 May 5, 2017, 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.

Christopher Shane Rivera ID: AF2999

Pelican Bay State Prison

5905 Lae Earl Drive

Crescent City, CA 95531 

Dated: May 5, 2017

Susan Y. Soong

Clerk, United States District Court

By:________________________

Ada Means, Deputy Clerk to the 

Honorable JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY