Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Brown v. Hubbard

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SACRAMENTO DIVISION


January 29, 2009

RONNIE BROWN, PLAINTIFF,
v.
SUZANNE HUBBARD, SECRETARY, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, ET. AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Edward F. Shea United States District Judge

ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO SUBMIT DOCUMENTS

Before the Court is pro se state prisoner Plaintiff Ronnie Brown's Complaint, alleging a Fourteenth Amendment procedural due process claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Ct. Rec. 1.) Under the Prisoner Litigation Reform Act of 1995, the Court is required to screen prisoner complaints seeking relief against a governmental entity or an officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). Claims that are legally frivolous or malicious, claims that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, and claims that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief are properly dismissed. Id. §§ 1915A(b)(1), (2) & 1915(e)(2).

After review, the Court finds the complaint states plausible 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims based on a Fourteenth Amendment procedural due process violation and orders Plaintiff to prepare and return service documents so that the U.S. Marshals may serve the complaint on Defendants Suzanne Hubbard, Karem E. Noujaim, and Suzanne Smith. All claims against Karen Thacker, Appeals Coordinator, are dismissed because she is immune from suit for damages under section 1983. See generally Moore v. Brewster, 96 F.3d 1240, 1244 (9th Cir. 1996) (applying absolute judicial immunity to certain court employees "who perform functions closely associated with the judicial process"). This immunity "extends to actions for declaratory, injunctive and other equitable relief." Id. at 1243.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

1. All section 1983 damage claims against Karen Thacker are dismissed with prejudice. The District Court Executive shall amend the caption to reflect that Karen Thacker is no longer a party.

2. Service is appropriate for the following Defendants: Suzanne Hubbard, Karem E. Noujaim, and Suzanne Smith.

3. The Clerk of Court shall immediately send Plaintiff a USM-285 form for each Defendant to be served, as well as a summons, instruction sheet, and a copy of the complaint (Ct. Rec. 1).

4. Within forty-five (45) days from the date of this Order, Plaintiff shall complete the attached Notice of Submission of Documents and submit the following documents to the Court:

a. The completed Notice of Submission of Documents;

b. One completed summons;

c. One completed USM-285 form for each Defendant listed in paragraph 2 above; and

d. four (4) copies of the complaint (Ct. Rec. 1).

5. Plaintiff need not attempt service on Defendants and need not request waiver of service. After receiving the above-described documents, the Court will issue a separate Order requiring the U.S. Marshals to serve each Defendant listed in paragraph 2.

6. The Court cautions Plaintiff that failing to submit the above-described documents within forty-five (45) days will be construed as permission to dismiss this lawsuit under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41.

IT IS SO ORDERED. The District Court Executive is directed to enter this Order and provide a copy to Plaintiff and the U.S. Marshals Service.

NOTICE OF SUBMISSION OF DOCUMENTS

Plaintiff hereby submits the following documents in compliance with the Court's Order filed

completed summons form;

completed USM-285 forms; and

copies of the complaint (Ct. Rec. 1).

20090129

© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.