Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

Dewayne Thompson v. Chris Mauck

September 4, 2012

DEWAYNE THOMPSON,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
CHRIS MAUCK, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Craig M. Kellison United States Magistrate Judge

AMENDED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the court is defendant Thompson's motion for summary judgment*fn1 (Doc. 35). The undersigned originally filed findings and recommendations granting defendant's motion for summary judgment on June 14, 2012. After those findings and recommendations were issued, but prior to the expiration of the objection period, the Ninth Circuit issued an opinion in Woods v. Carey, 684 F.3d 934 (9th Cir. 2012), requiring notice be given to a prisoner plaintiff as to what is required to defeat a motion for summary judgment at the time such a motion is filed. The required notice was not originally provided to plaintiff contemporaneously with the filing of the pending motion. Defendant therefore provided the necessary supplemental notice to plaintiff on July 6, 2012. The court then allowed time for the parities to submit supplemental briefs in support of their position on the motion for summary judgment. Those supplemental briefs have now been received and considered (Docs. 43, 44, 45). The supplemental briefs do not materially alter the analysis of the motion for summary judgment. These amended findings and recommendations are therefore reissued without significant alteration and minimal additional analysis.

I. BACKGROUND

A. Plaintiff's Allegations

The court has summarized plaintiff's claims as follows: Plaintiff's complaint raises issues with disparage treatment he claims he received from various prison staff for complaining about the use of racial epithets. He claims defendant Mauck used the word "nigger" either to or around him. When he complained of the use of that language, defendant Mauck discriminated against him by changing his job in the canteen. He then filed a grievance and defendant Thompson changed his job assignment again. He alleges these two defendants violated his Equal Protection rights as he was treated differently because of his race.

B. Undisputed Facts

Defendant Thompson submits that there are no relevant facts in dispute. Specifically, defendant contends that plaintiff admitted during his deposition that defendant Thompson did not racially discriminate against him. As relevant to defendant Thompson, the undersigned finds the following facts are undisputed.

1. At the times relevant to this case, plaintiff was incarcerated at High Desert State Prison (HDSP);

2. Plaintiff is an African-American male inmate;

3. Plaintiff began working in the canteen at HDSP on June 6, 2009;

4. On August 6, 2009, plaintiff was reassigned to a kitchen job in Facility D;

5. During the time plaintiff was assigned to the kitchen job, August 6, 2009 through August 25, 2009, he was called to work on August 11, 13, 14, and 15, 2009.

6. Plaintiff was reassigned to a job as an Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) assistant, on August 25, 2009;

7. In August 2009, defendant Thompson was a Facility D dining hall officer, whose duties included providing security for the dining hall ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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