United States District Court, E.D. California
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RECOMMENDING DEFENDANT
BARNES' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT BE GRANTED
Juan Jaimes is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this
civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
before the Court is Defendant Dr. Barnes' motion for
summary judgment, filed October 14, 2016.
action is proceeding against Defendants Dr. Barnes and
Neighbors for deliberate indifference to a serious medical
Neighbors filed an answer to the complaint on September 15,
2015, and Defendant Barnes filed an answer to the complaint
on September 21, 2015.
August 2, 2016, Defendants' exhaustion-related motions
for summary judgment were granted in part and denied in part,
and the action was determined to proceed against Defendants
Dr. Barnes and Neighbors for deliberate indifference to a
serious medical need.
previously stated, on October 14, 2016, Defendant Dr. Barnes
filed a motion for summary judgment. Although Plaintiff
requested and received two extensions of time to file an
opposition, no opposition was filed and the time to do so has
expired. Accordingly, Dr. Barnes' motion for
summary judgment is deemed submitted for review without oral
argument. Local Rule 230(1).
JUDGMENT LEGAL STANDARD
party may move for summary judgment, and the Court shall
grant summary judgment if the movant shows that there is no
genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is
entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a)
(quotation marks omitted); Washington Mutual Inc. v.
U.S., 636 F.3d 1207, 1216 (9th Cir. 2011). Each
party's position, whether it be that a fact is disputed
or undisputed, must be supported by (1) citing to particular
parts of materials in the record, including but not limited
to depositions, documents, declarations, or discovery; or (2)
showing that the materials cited do not establish the
presence or absence of a genuine dispute or that the opposing
party cannot produce admissible evidence to support the fact.
Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c)(1) (quotation marks omitted). The Court
may consider other materials in the record not cited to by
the parties, but it is not required to do so. Fed.R.Civ.P.
56(c)(3); Carmen v. San Francisco Unified School
Dist., 237 F.3d 1026, 1031 (9th Cir. 2001); accord
Simmons v. Navajo County, Ariz., 609 F.3d 1011, 1017
(9th Cir. 2010).
bears the burden of proof at trial, and to prevail on summary
judgment, he must affirmatively demonstrate that no
reasonable trier of fact could find other than for him.
Soremekun v. Thrifty Payless, Inc., 509 F.3d 978,
984 (9th Cir. 2007). Defendants do not bear the burden of
proof at trial and in moving for summary judgment they need
only prove an absence of evidence to support Plaintiff's
case. In re Oracle Corp. Sec. Litig., 627 F.3d 376,
387 (9th Cir. 2010). If Defendants meet their initial burden,
the burden then shifts to Plaintiff “to designate
specific facts demonstrating the existence of genuine issues
for trial.” In re Oracle Corp., 627 F.3d at
387 (citing Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317,
323 (1986)). This requires Plaintiff to “show more than
the mere existence of a scintilla of evidence.” In
re Oracle Corp., 627 F.3d at 387 (citing Anderson v.
Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 252 (1986)).
in judging the evidence at the summary judgment stage, the
Court may not make credibility determinations or weigh
conflicting evidence, Soremekun, 509 F.3d at 984
(quotation marks and citation omitted), and it must draw all
inferences in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party
and determine whether a genuine issue of material fact
precludes entry of judgment, Comite de Jornaleros de
Redondo Beach v. City of Redondo Beach, 657 F.3d 936,
942 (9th Cir. 2011) (quotation marks and citation omitted).
The Court determines only whether there is a genuine
issue for trial and in doing so, it must liberally construe
Plaintiff's filings because he is a pro se prisoner.
Thomas v. Ponder, 611 F.3d 1144, 1150 (9th Cir.
2010) (quotation marks and citations omitted).
arriving at this recommendation, the Court has carefully
reviewed and considered all arguments, points and
authorities, declarations, exhibits, statements of undisputed
facts, and other papers filed by the parties. Omission of
reference to an argument, document, paper, or objection is
not to be construed to the effect that this Court did not
consider the argument, document, paper, or objection. This
Court thoroughly reviewed and considered the evidence it
deemed admissible, material, and appropriate.
Summary of Plaintiff's Complaint
April 6, 2012, while at KVSP Facility B-yard, between 2:00
and 2:30 p.m., Plaintiff was playing basketball and jumping
for the ball, he landed and was pinned between several other
inmates. Approximately a minute later, Plaintiff felt his
back crack/pop/snap causing sharp throbbing and excruciating
pain. Plaintiff was not able to move or stand from the waist
up. Although Plaintiff summoned medical assistance, he did
not receive any assistance. Plaintiff heard Defendant
Neighbors and another unidentified correctional officer say,
“you need to get your ass up and walk to the clinic if
you want to get checked out, because I am not going to be
carrying your ass, you decide.” Plaintiff explained to
Defendant Neighbors that he could not get up because his back
snapped. Defendant Neighbors stated that he did not care
because it was not his problem. Plaintiff observed two
unknown inmates who witnessed the incident, and the two
inmates carried and moved Plaintiff from where he was laying
on his back to the clinic. While at the yard clinic, an
unknown licensed vocational nurse (LVN) took Plaintiff's
vitals and Plaintiff explained what happened. The LVN told
Plaintiff that she was going to prepare the paperwork so that
Plaintiff could be seen by a doctor at the Correctional
Treatment Center (CTC) located within the facility. Shortly
thereafter, Defendant Neighbors and an unknown officer went
to Plaintiff's location and informed Plaintiff that he
would have to be placed in shackles in order to transport him
to CTC. Plaintiff stated that he could not get up or move at
all. Defendant Neighbors again stated that Plaintiff would
not be going anywhere until he was shackled, and Plaintiff
was forced into shackles by Defendant Neighbors and an
arrived at CTC by ambulance between 3:30 and 4:00 p.m. Upon
arrival, Plaintiff was placed in an observation room and
approximately twenty minutes later his vital signs were
taken. Plaintiff informed the nurse that he could not move
any part of his upper body and was experiencing excruciating
approximately 7:30 and 8:00 p.m., Defendant J. Barnes
examined Plaintiff. Plaintiff explained that he injured his
back and could not move due to the excruciating pain.
Defendant Barnes told Plaintiff he looked fine. Shortly
thereafter Plaintiff was taken to the x-ray room, and during
the transport Defendant Barnes stated, “you guy[s]
complain about everything, even when there [is] nothing
wrong, you guys get better treatment then the people out
here.” After the x-rays, Plaintiff was taken back to
the observation room where he stood for hours at a table.
Defendant Barnes returned to the room and told Plaintiff he
was fine that it was just muscle back spasms. Plaintiff was
discharged back to custody officer Defendant Neighbors
without further treatment.
requested that Defendant Neighbors get supervisor approval to
cuff Plaintiff in front due to the pain in his back but his
request was not accommodated. Plaintiff was escorted and
placed in his cell where he laid on his back for five days,
and he was forced to get from his bed and walk the stairs to
shower and receive food. During the shower, there was no
chair or bench to assist Plaintiff. Plaintiff had to endure
this treatment from April 6, 2012, through April 17, 2012.
Defendant's Statement of Undisputed
April 6, 2012, Plaintiff was playing basketball at Kern
Valley State Prison (KVSP) when he fell and other inmates
landed on top of him. (Dep. of Juan Jaimes (“Pl.
Dep.”) at 9:5-9, 9:14-19; Levin Decl. at ¶ 6(a).)
Plaintiff sustained injuries to his back from the accident.
(Pl. Dep. at ...