1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 MICHAEL GUEVARA, Case No. 22-cv-04759-WHO (PR) Plaintiff, 8 ORDER OF SERVICE; v. 9 ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANT TO FILE A DISPOSITIVE MOTION 10 D. RICHARDSON, OR NOTICE REGARDING SUCH MOTION; Defendant. 11 INSTRUCTIONS TO CLERK 12 13 14 INTRODUCTION 15 Plaintiff Michael Guevara alleges D. Richardson, a sergeant at the San Mateo 16 County Jail, disclosed Guevara’s private medical information, thereby violating his right to 17 privacy. His

complaint containing these allegations is now before the 18 Court for review pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). 19 Kramer has stated cognizable claims against D. Richardson. The Court directs 20 defendant Richardson to file in response to the complaint a dispositive motion, or a notice 21 regarding such motion, on or before April 10, 2023. 22 DISCUSSION 23 A. Standard of Review 24 A federal court must conduct a preliminary screening in any case in which a 25 prisoner seeks redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a 26 governmental entity. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). In its review, the court must identify any 27 cognizable claims and dismiss any claims that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim 1 from such relief. See id. § 1915A(b)(1), (2). Pro se pleadings must be liberally construed. 2 See Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep’t,

(9th Cir. 1988). 3 A “complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a 4 claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’” Ashcroft v. Iqbal,

(2009) 5 (quoting Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly,

(2007)). “A claim has facial 6 plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the 7 reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.”

(quoting 8 Twombly,

). Furthermore, a court “is not required to accept legal 9 conclusions cast in the form of factual allegations if those conclusions cannot reasonably 10 be drawn from the facts alleged.” Clegg v. Cult Awareness Network,

, 754–55 11 (9th Cir. 1994). 12 To state a claim under

, a plaintiff must allege two essential 13 elements: (1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was 14 violated, and (2) that the alleged violation was committed by a person acting under the 15 color of state law. See West v. Atkins,

(1988). 16 B. Legal Claims 17 Guevara alleges that on April 30, 2022 at the San Mateo County Jail Sergeant D. 18 Richardson ordered him to his cell and then said in front of plaintiff’s pod, “And I don’t 19 want to hear about your heart problems.” (Compl., Dkt. No. 1 at 3.) When liberally 20 construed, Guevara has stated a Fourteenth Amendment privacy claim against Richardson. 21 CONCLUSION 22 For the foregoing reasons, the Court orders as follows: 23 1. The Court orders service of the complaint (Dkt. No. 1), and all attachments 24 thereto, on defendant D. Richardson, a sergeant at the San Mateo County Jail, and orders 25 this defendant to respond to the cognizable claims raised in the complaint. 26 2. On or before April 10, 2023, defendant shall file a motion for summary 27 judgment or other dispositive motion with respect to the claim(s) in the complaint found to 1 a. If defendant elects to file a motion to dismiss on the grounds plaintiff 2 failed to exhaust his available administrative remedies as required by 42 U.S.C. 3 § 1997e(a), defendant shall do so in a motion for summary judgment, as required by 4 Albino v. Baca,

(9th Cir. 2014). 5 b. Any motion for summary judgment shall be supported by adequate 6 factual documentation and shall conform in all respects to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of 7 Civil Procedure. Defendant is advised that summary judgment cannot be granted, nor 8 qualified immunity found, if material facts are in dispute. If any defendant is of the 9 opinion that this case cannot be resolved by summary judgment, he shall so inform the 10 Court prior to the date the summary judgment motion is due. 11 3. Plaintiff’s opposition to the dispositive motion shall be filed with the Court 12 and served on defendant no later than forty-five (45) days from the date defendant’s 13 motion is filed. 14 4. Defendant shall file a reply brief no later than fifteen (15) days after 15 plaintiff’s opposition is filed. 16 5. The motion shall be deemed submitted as of the date the reply brief is due. 17 No hearing will be held on the motion unless the Court so orders at a later date. 18 6. All communications by the plaintiff with the Court must be served on 19 defendants, or defendant’s counsel once counsel has been designated, by mailing a true 20 copy of the document to defendant or defendant’s counsel. 21 7. Discovery may be taken in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil 22 Procedure. No further court order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(a)(2) or Local 23 Rule 16-1 is required before the parties may conduct discovery. 24 Plaintiff is reminded that state prisoners may review all non-confidential material in 25 their medical and central files, pursuant to In re Olson,

(Cal. Ct. App. 26 1974); 15 California Code of Regulations § 3370; and the CDCR’s Department Operations 27 Manual §§ 13030.4, 13030.16, 13030.16.1-13030.16.3, 13030.21, and 71010.11.1. 1 prison officials, not to the court. 2 Plaintiff may also use any applicable jail procedures to request copies of (or the 3 opportunity to review) any reports, medical records, or other records maintained by jail 4 officials that are relevant to the claims found cognizable in this order. Such requests must 5 be made directly to jail officials, not to the court. 6 8. It is plaintiff’s responsibility to prosecute this case. Plaintiff must keep the 7 Court informed of any change of address and must comply with the Court’s orders in a 8 timely fashion. Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of this action for failure to 9 prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). 10 9. Extensions of time must be filed no later than the deadline sought to be 11 extended and must be accompanied by a showing of good cause. 12 10. A decision from the Ninth Circuit requires that pro se prisoner-plaintiffs be 13 given “notice of what is required of them in order to oppose” summary judgment motions 14 at the time of filing of the motions, rather than when the court orders service of process or 15 otherwise before the motions are filed. Woods v. Carey,

(9th Cir. 16 2012). Defendant shall provide the following notice to plaintiff when he files and serves 17 any motion for summary judgment: 18 The defendants have made a motion for summary judgment by which they 19 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 20 case. 21 Rule 56 tells you what you must do in order to oppose a motion for summary 22 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 23 fact that would affect the result of your case, the party who asked for 24 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 25 judgment that is properly supported by declarations (or other sworn testimony), you cannot simply rely on what your complaint says. Instead, 26 you must set out specific facts in declarations, depositions, answers to 27 interrogatories, or authenticated documents, as provided in Rule 56(e), that 1 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, 2 may be entered against you. If summary judgment is granted, your case will 3 be dismissed and there will be no trial. Rand y. Rowland,

(9th Cir. 1998). 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 5 Dated: January 11, 2023 . 6 ® 7 ILLIAM H. ORRICK United States District Judge 8 9 10 11 a 12

13

© 15 16

Z 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28