Opinion ID: 70446
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Constitutional Violation by Cabezuela

Text: Cabezuela contends that Plano demonstrated that Cabezuela's actions in connection with Sanders's death did not violate the constitution, therefore, this Court should affirm the district court's dismissal of all federal claims. [15] But as Sanders-Burns explains in reply, her claims against Plano are based on Plano's allegedly inadequate training policies and procedures. The claims against Cabezuela are based on the alleged use of excessive force and deliberate indifference to Sanders's health and safety. The claims against Plano and Cabezuela are distinct and the district court may easily grant summary judgment in favor of Plano while finding issues of material fact present that allow the claims against Cabezuela to proceed. Because the district court ruled that Sanders-Burns's amended complaint did not relate back to her original complaint, the claims against Cabezuela in his individual capacity were never properly before the district court and the record on this issue is not fully developed. Thus, while we may affirm a district court's Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal on any grounds raised below and supported by the record, Cuvillier v. Sullivan, 503 F.3d 397, 401 (2007) (citation omitted), we decline to do so in the instant case based on the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Plano.