Case: Rodriguez v. County of Los Angeles

2:10-cv-06342 | U.S. District Court for the Central District of California

Filed Date: Aug. 20, 2010

Closed Date: Nov. 26, 2018

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On August 20, 2010, five inmates in the Los Angeles County Men's Central Jail filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. Proceeding under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against deputy sheriffs, the plaintiffs, represented by private counsel, sought damages, claiming violations of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. Specifically, the inmates claimed that the deputies systematically beat them during a cell extraction after the inmates protes…

On February 25, 2013, Judge Consuelo B. Marshall denied plaintiffs' motion to strike the defendants' answer and enter judgment, but Judge Marshall did grant the plaintiffs' alternative motion to impose other lesser sanctions for spoliation of evidence.

On July 12, 2013, Judge Marshall denied the defendants' motions for summary judgment but granted a defendant's motion for joinder and plaintiffs' motion in limine to admit the Citizens' Commission on Jail Violence Report. The defendants appealed this decision to the Ninth Circuit. The plaintiffs moved that this appeal was frivolous. The Ninth Circuit denied the defendants' motion to stay the district court proceedings pending the appeal. As such, the district court proceedings continued and the Ninth Circuit never ruled on this appeal.

After a five-week trial, on February 5, 2014, the jury returned a unanimous verdict of civil rights violations triggering $710,000 in damages and $240,000 in punitive damages. In addition, the district court awarded $5.4 million in attorney fees based on the difficulty of the litigation and the challenge of representing convicted inmates against law enforcement in a jail conflict. After this judgment, the defendants moved for judgment as a matter of law, to vacate the judgment and for a new trial, to vacate punitive damages, and/or for a new trial. The defendants also appealed the judgment to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. In 2014 and 2015, the defendants filed a total of three amended appeals to the Ninth Circuit.

On May 29, 2014, Judge Marshall denied all defendants' motions (1) for judgment as matter of law; (2) to vacate judgment and for a new trial after resolution of interlocutory qualified immunity appeals; (3) to vacate punitive damages; and (4) for a new trial. 2014 WL 8396787 (C.D. Cal. May 29, 2014).

On December 29, 2014, Judge Marshall issued an order and opinion regarding attorney's fees. Most importantly, Judge Marshall held that (1) California's Bane Act's attorney's fees provision did not conflict with the Prison Litigation Reform Act; (2) the majority of services rendered in opposition to summary judgment would be as §1983 only time (and therefore receiving lower reimbursement rates), rather than under the Bane Act; and (3) inmates were entitled to recover fully compensatory attorneys' fees. 2014 WL 8390755 (C.D. Cal. Dec. 29, 2014).

In the district court, the plaintiffs moved to retax costs and to award nontaxable expenses on May 15, 2015. They sought a total of $89,648.64. On November 12, 2015, the court denied the plaintiffs' motion to retax costs and granted their motion to award nontaxable costs of $39,928.35.

On May 30, 2018, the Ninth Circuit (Circuit Judges William A. Fletcher and Sandra S. Ikuta, and District Judge Sarah Evans Barker, sitting by designation) affirmed the district court's judgment in favor of plaintiffs, award of compensatory and punitive damages, and award of attorneys' fees. 891 F.3d 776 (9th Cir. 2018). Specifically, the panel denied the defendants' request to vacate the final judgment on the basis that the district court lacked jurisdiction. Regarding the exhaustion of administrative remedies, the panel held that the district court did not clearly err in finding that a reasonable fear of retaliation made the grievance system effectively unavailable for appellees. Additionally, the panel found that the district court did not err in denying the defendants' motion for judgment as a matter of law based on qualified immunity: there was sufficient evidence of a constitutional violation and the law was clearly established. The supervisors were not entitled to qualified immunity or immunity under state law. Further, the panel held that the record supported the jury's verdict and the district court's ruling of municipal liability. Finally, the panel upheld the jury's award of punitive damages and the district court's attorneys' fee award.

The parties agreed that the plaintiffs will be paid an additional $825,000.00 in attorneys' fees and costs relating to the appeal. The parties also agreed that the plaintiffs were owed post-judgment interest on compensatory damages, punitive damages, attorneys' fees, and costs. Thus, the final total amount of the judgment was $7,289,973.77.

	Document
2:10-cv-06342 13-56292 14-55374	Docket [PACER]	Dec. 7, 2018	Dec. 7, 2018 Docket
1 2:10-cv-06342	Complaint for Damages for Violations of Federal Civil Rights (Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment)	Aug. 25, 2010	Aug. 25, 2010 Complaint
76 2:10-cv-06342	Second Amended Complaint for Damages for Violations of Federal Civil Rights (Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment)	Sept. 26, 2011	Sept. 26, 2011 Complaint
202 2:10-cv-06342	Order Denying Plaintiff's Motion to Strike Defendants' Answer and Enter Judgment but Granting Plaintiffs' Alternative to Impose Other Lesser Sanctions for Spoliation of Evidence	Feb. 25, 2013	Feb. 25, 2013 Order/Opinion
261 2:10-cv-06342	Order Denying Motions for Summary Judgment, Granting Motion for Joinder, and Granting Motion in Limine	July 12, 2013	July 12, 2013 Order/Opinion
295 2:10-cv-06342	Plaintiffs' Memorandum of Contentions of Fact and Law	July 29, 2013	July 29, 2013 Pleading / Motion / Brief
297 2:10-cv-06342	Defendant Hernan Delgado's Memorandum of Contentions of Fact and Law	July 29, 2013	July 29, 2013 Pleading / Motion / Brief
626 2:10-cv-06342	Judgment	Feb. 5, 2014	Feb. 5, 2014 Order/Opinion
693 2:10-cv-06342	Order Denying Defendants' Motions (1) for Judgment as a Matter of Law; (2) Motion to Vacate Judgment as to Moving Defendant as and for a New Trial for These Defendants After Resolution of Interlocutory Qualified Immunity Appeals; (3) to Vacate...	May 29, 2014	May 29, 2014 Order/Opinion
750 2:10-cv-06342	Defendants' Third Amended Notice of Appeal (Ninth Circuit Docket No. 14-55374) as to Docket No. 747	June 26, 2014	June 26, 2014 Notice Letter

ECF Number	Description	Date	Link Date / Link
1	COMPLAINT against Defendants County of Los Angeles, Does 1 through 10, Los Angeles Sheriff's. Case assigned to Judge Consuelo B. Marshall for all further proceedings. Discovery referred to Magistrate Judge Andrew J. Wistrich.(Filing fee $ 350: PAID), filed by plaintiff Heriberto Rodriguez.(ghap) (ds). (Entered: 08/25/2010)	Aug. 25, 2010	Aug. 25, 2010 Clearinghouse
2	CERTIFICATION AND NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Heriberto Rodriguez. (ghap) (Additional attachment(s) added on 8/25/2010: # 1 Notice) (ds). (Entered: 08/25/2010)	Aug. 25, 2010	Aug. 25, 2010 PACER
3	AMENDED DOCUMENT filed by Plaintiff Heriberto Rodriguez. First Amended Complaint (Muller, James) (Entered: 09/20/2010)	Sept. 20, 2010	Sept. 20, 2010 PACER
4	NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronically Filed Documents, RE: Amended Document (Non-Motion) 3 . The following error(s) was found: L.R. 3-2, Filing of Initiating Documents. Complaints (including first amended complaint, counter-claims, etc) and other initiating documents in civil cases shall be filed in the traditional manner on paper rather than electronically. Please manually file your first amended complaint. In response to this notice the court may order (1) an amended or correct document to be filed (2) the document stricken or (3) take other action as the court deems appropriate. You need not take any action in response to this notice unless and until the court directs you to do so. (lom) (Entered: 09/21/2010)	Sept. 21, 2010	Sept. 21, 2010 PACER
5	FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 1 against Defendants County of Los Angeles, Does, Los Angeles Sheriff's Department, Daniel Cruz, Matt Onhemus, Clayton Stelter, Andrew Lyons, Frank Quintana, Justin Bravo, Javier Guzman, Herman Delgado, Adrian Ruiz, Carlos Ortega filed by Plaintiffs Heriberto Rodriguez, Carlos Flores, Juan Trinidad, Erick Nunez, Juan Carlos Sanchez. (lom) (Additional attachment(s) added on 9/27/2010: # 1 Summons Issued) (lom). (Entered: 09/27/2010) 1 Summons Issued View on PACER	Sept. 22, 2010	Sept. 22, 2010 PACER
6	PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Carlos Flores, Juan Trinidad, Heriberto Rodriguez, Erick Nunez, Juan Carlos Sanchez, upon Defendant Adrian Ruiz served on 10/1/2010, answer due 10/22/2010. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Deputy Adam Kennedy in compliance with statute not specified by personal service. Original Summons NOT returned. (Attachments: # 1 Supplement AO440 Proof of Service)(Muller, James) (Entered: 10/05/2010) 1 Supplement AO440 Proof of Service View on PACER	Oct. 5, 2010	Oct. 5, 2010 PACER
7	PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Carlos Flores, Juan Trinidad, Heriberto Rodriguez, Erick Nunez, Juan Carlos Sanchez, upon Defendant Herman Delgado served on 9/28/2010, answer due 10/19/2010. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Deputy Adam Kennedy in compliance with statute not specified by personal service. Original Summons NOT returned. (Attachments: # 1 Supplement AO440 Proof of Service)(Muller, James) (Entered: 10/05/2010) 1 Supplement AO440 Proof of Service View on PACER	Oct. 5, 2010	Oct. 5, 2010 PACER
8	PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Carlos Flores, Juan Trinidad, Heriberto Rodriguez, Erick Nunez, Juan Carlos Sanchez, upon Defendant Frank Quintana served on 9/28/2010, answer due 10/19/2010. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Deputy Adam Kennedy in compliance with statute not specified by personal service. Original Summons NOT returned. (Attachments: # 1 Supplement AO440 Proof of Service)(Muller, James) (Entered: 10/05/2010) 1 Supplement AO440 Proof of Service View on PACER	Oct. 5, 2010	Oct. 5, 2010 PACER
9	PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Carlos Flores, Juan Trinidad, Heriberto Rodriguez, Erick Nunez, Juan Carlos Sanchez, upon Defendant Andrew Lyons served on 9/28/2010, answer due 10/19/2010. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Deputy Adam Kennedy in compliance with statute not specified by personal service. Original Summons NOT returned. (Attachments: # 1 Supplement AO440 Proof of Service)(Muller, James) (Entered: 10/05/2010) 1 Supplement AO440 Proof of Service View on PACER	Oct. 5, 2010	Oct. 5, 2010 PACER
10	PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Carlos Flores, Juan Trinidad, Heriberto Rodriguez, Erick Nunez, Juan Carlos Sanchez, upon Defendant Daniel Cruz served on 9/28/2010, answer due 10/19/2010. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Deputy Adam Kennedy in compliance with statute not specified by personal service. Original Summons NOT returned. (Attachments: # 1 Supplement AO440 Proof of Service)(Muller, James) (Entered: 10/05/2010) 1 Supplement AO440 Proof of Service View on PACER	Oct. 5, 2010	Oct. 5, 2010 PACER
11	PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Carlos Flores, Juan Trinidad, Heriberto Rodriguez, Erick Nunez, Juan Carlos Sanchez, upon Defendant Justin Bravo served on 9/28/2010, answer due 10/19/2010. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Deputy Adam Kennedy in compliance with statute not specified by personal service. Original Summons NOT returned. (Attachments: # 1 Supplement AO440 Proof of Service)(Muller, James) (Entered: 10/05/2010) 1 Supplement AO440 Proof of Service View on PACER	Oct. 5, 2010	Oct. 5, 2010 PACER
12	PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Carlos Flores, Juan Trinidad, Heriberto Rodriguez, Erick Nunez, Juan Carlos Sanchez, upon Defendant Javier Guzman served on 9/28/2010, answer due 10/19/2010. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Deputy Adam Kennedy in compliance with statute not specified by personal service. Original Summons NOT returned. (Attachments: # 1 Supplement AO440 Proof of Service)(Muller, James) (Entered: 10/05/2010) 1 Supplement AO440 Proof of Service View on PACER	Oct. 5, 2010	Oct. 5, 2010 PACER
13	PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Carlos Flores, Juan Trinidad, Heriberto Rodriguez, Erick Nunez, Juan Carlos Sanchez, upon Defendant County of Los Angeles served on 10/1/2010, answer due 10/22/2010. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Tammy Johnson, Deputy Clerk in compliance with statute not specified by service on a domestic corporation, unincorporated association, or public entity. Original Summons NOT returned. (Attachments: # 1 Supplement AO440 Proof of Service)(Muller, James) (Entered: 10/05/2010) 1 Supplement AO440 Proof of Service View on PACER	Oct. 5, 2010	Oct. 5, 2010 PACER
14	PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Carlos Flores, Juan Trinidad, Heriberto Rodriguez, Erick Nunez, Juan Carlos Sanchez, upon Defendant Clayton Stelter served on 9/29/2010, answer due 10/20/2010. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon C. Rogers, #244756 in compliance with California Code of Civil Procedure by personal service. Original Summons NOT returned. (Muller, James) (Entered: 10/05/2010)	Oct. 5, 2010	Oct. 5, 2010 PACER
15	NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Defendants Justin Bravo, County of Los Angeles, Daniel Cruz, Herman Delgado, Javier Guzman, Los Angeles Sheriff's Department, Andrew Lyons, Matt Onhemus, Carlos Ortega, Frank Quintana, Adrian Ruiz, Clayton Stelter, (Choi, Jin) (Entered: 10/22/2010)	Oct. 22, 2010	Oct. 22, 2010 PACER
16	ANSWER to Amended Complaint, 5 with JURY DEMAND filed by Defendants Justin Bravo, County of Los Angeles, Herman Delgado, Javier Guzman, Los Angeles Sheriff's Department, Andrew Lyons, Matt Onhemus, Carlos Ortega, Frank Quintana, Adrian Ruiz, Clayton Stelter.(Choi, Jin) (Entered: 10/22/2010)	Oct. 22, 2010	Oct. 22, 2010 PACER
17	MINUTES IN CHAMBERS RE Scheduling Conference by Judge Consuelo B. Marshall. On the Court's own motion, this case is set for a Scheduling Conference on Jan. 24, 2011 at 11:00 A. M. pursuant to FRCP 16(b). Counsel are reminded of their obligations to disclose information and confer on a discovery plan not later than 21 days prior to the Scheduling Conference. Counsel shall file a Rule 26(f) discovery plan within 14 days after the conference of counsel. The Rule 26(f) discovery plan shall contain the following information: 1. A brief description of the nature of the case and type of action filed and the date filed in the District Court; 2. The number of depositions to be taken by each side and the date the date the depositions are set; 3. The written discovery sought and date responses to interrogatories requests for production and requests for admissions are due; 4. The number of experts expected to be called by each side and the expert's area of expertise; 5. Proposed Pre Trial Conference date; 6. Date Demand for Jury Trial was filed; 7. Prospects of Settlement; 8. Positions of counsel re: consent to proceed before a Magistrate Judge; 9. A list of contemplated motions, including what type of motion, a tentative hearing date, and whether discovery must be conducted prior to the filing of the motions. (lom) (Entered: 10/26/2010)	Oct. 26, 2010	Oct. 26, 2010 PACER
18	PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Carlos Flores, Juan Trinidad, Heriberto Rodriguez, Erick Nunez, Juan Carlos Sanchez, upon Defendant Matt Onhemus served on 10/26/2010, answer due 11/16/2010. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Deputy Dirks #221990 in compliance with California Code of Civil Procedure by personal service. Original Summons NOT returned. (Muller, James) (Entered: 11/01/2010)	Nov. 1, 2010	Nov. 1, 2010 PACER
19	PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Carlos Flores, Juan Trinidad, Heriberto Rodriguez, Erick Nunez, Juan Carlos Sanchez, upon Defendant Carlos Ortega served on 10/25/2010, answer due 11/15/2010. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Sgt. Ralph J. Gama in compliance with California Code of Civil Procedure by personal service. Original Summons NOT returned. (Muller, James) (Entered: 11/01/2010)	Nov. 1, 2010	Nov. 1, 2010 PACER
20	[DOCUMENT STRICKEN] NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss First Amended Complaint filed by Defendants Justin Bravo, County of Los Angeles, Daniel Cruz, Herman Delgado, Javier Guzman, Los Angeles Sheriff's Department, Andrew Lyons, Matt Onhemus, Carlos Ortega, Frank Quintana, Adrian Ruiz, Clayton Stelter. Motion set for hearing on 12/20/2010 at 11:00 AM before Judge Consuelo B. Marshall. (Choi, Jin) Modified on 11/18/2010 (bp). (Entered: 11/17/2010)	Nov. 17, 2010	Nov. 17, 2010 PACER
21	REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE re MOTION to Dismiss First Amended Complaint 20 filed by Defendants Justin Bravo, County of Los Angeles, Daniel Cruz, Herman Delgado, Javier Guzman, Los Angeles Sheriff's Department, Andrew Lyons, Matt Onhemus, Carlos Ortega, Frank Quintana, Adrian Ruiz, Clayton Stelter. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibits A-C, # 2 Exhibits D-E)(Choi, Jin) (Entered: 11/17/2010) 1 Exhibits A-C View on PACER 2 Exhibits D-E View on PACER	Nov. 17, 2010	Nov. 17, 2010 PACER
22	NOTICE OF LODGING filed re Declaration of Deputy Adam Kennedy; Exhibit "A" and "B" re MOTION to Dismiss First Amended Complaint 20 (Choi, Jin) (Entered: 11/18/2010)	Nov. 18, 2010	Nov. 18, 2010 PACER
23	MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge Consuelo B. Marshall: The Court strikes MOTION to Dismiss First Amended Complaint 20 . The Court notes for the record that the Declaration of Adam Kennedy is unsigned. (jl) (Entered: 11/18/2010)	Nov. 18, 2010	Nov. 18, 2010 PACER
24	NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss First Amended Complaint filed by Defendants Justin Bravo, County of Los Angeles, Daniel Cruz, Herman Delgado, Javier Guzman, Los Angeles Sheriff's Department, Andrew Lyons, Matt Onhemus, Carlos Ortega, Frank Quintana, Adrian Ruiz, Clayton Stelter. Motion set for hearing on 12/20/2010 at 11:00 AM before Judge Consuelo B. Marshall. (Choi, Jin) (Entered: 11/18/2010)	Nov. 18, 2010	Nov. 18, 2010 PACER
25	IN CHAMBERS/OFF THE RECORD by Judge Consuelo B. Marshall: The Court hereby strikes the Motion of Defendants Carlos Ortega and Matt Ohnemus (doc.#20). The Court notes for the record that the Declaration of Adam Kennedy is unsigned re: MOTION to Dismiss First Amended Complaint 20 . (bp) (Entered: 11/18/2010)	Nov. 18, 2010	Nov. 18, 2010 PACER
26	MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge Consuelo B. Marshall: MOTION to Dismiss First Amended Complaint 24 is submitted without oral argument. (jl) (Entered: 11/18/2010)	Nov. 18, 2010	Nov. 18, 2010 PACER
27	REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE re MOTION to Dismiss First Amended Complaint 24 filed by defendants Justin Bravo, County of Los Angeles, Daniel Cruz, Herman Delgado, Javier Guzman, Los Angeles Sheriff's Department, Andrew Lyons, Matt Onhemus, Carlos Ortega, Frank Quintana, Adrian Ruiz, Clayton Stelter. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibits A-C, # 2 Exhibits D-E)(Choi, Jin) (Entered: 11/18/2010) 1 Exhibits A-C View on PACER 2 Exhibits D-E View on PACER	Nov. 18, 2010	Nov. 18, 2010 PACER
28	First STIPULATION for Extension of Time to File Response as to MOTION to Dismiss First Amended Complaint 24 filed by plaintiff Heriberto Rodriguez. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Muller, James) (Entered: 11/24/2010) 1 Proposed Order View on PACER	Nov. 24, 2010	Nov. 24, 2010 PACER
29	MEMORANDUM in Opposition to MOTION to Dismiss First Amended Complaint 24 filed by Plaintiff Carlos Flores. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibit A)(Muller, James) (Entered: 12/06/2010) 1 Exhibit Exhibit A View on PACER	Dec. 6, 2010	Dec. 6, 2010 PACER
30	REPLY to Plaintiffs' Opposition in Support of MOTION to Dismiss First Amended Complaint 24 filed by Defendants Justin Bravo, County of Los Angeles, Daniel Cruz, Herman Delgado, Javier Guzman, Los Angeles Sheriff's, Andrew Lyons, Matt Onhemus, Carlos Ortega, Frank Quintana, Adrian Ruiz, Clayton Stelter. (Choi, Jin) (Entered: 12/13/2010)	Dec. 13, 2010	Dec. 13, 2010 PACER
31	REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE re MOTION to Dismiss First Amended Complaint 24 in Support of Reply to Opposition 30 filed by Defendants Justin Bravo, County of Los Angeles, Daniel Cruz, Herman Delgado, Javier Guzman, Los Angeles Sheriff's Department, Andrew Lyons, Matt Onhemus, Carlos Ortega, Frank Quintana, Adrian Ruiz, Clayton Stelter. (Choi, Jin) (Entered: 12/13/2010)	Dec. 13, 2010	Dec. 13, 2010 PACER
32	JOINT REPORT Rule 26(f) Discovery Plan ; estimated length of trial 7-12 days, filed by Defendants Justin Bravo, County of Los Angeles, Daniel Cruz, Herman Delgado, Javier Guzman, Los Angeles Sheriff's Department, Andrew Lyons, Matt Onhemus, Carlos Ortega, Frank Quintana, Adrian Ruiz, Clayton Stelter.. (Choi, Jin) (Entered: 12/21/2010)	Dec. 21, 2010	Dec. 21, 2010 PACER
33	JOINDER in MOTION to Dismiss First Amended Complaint 24 filed by Defendants Justin Bravo, County of Los Angeles, Daniel Cruz, Herman Delgado, Javier Guzman, Los Angeles Sheriff's Department, Andrew Lyons, Matt Onhemus, Carlos Ortega, Frank Quintana, Adrian Ruiz, Clayton Stelter. (Choi, Jin) (Entered: 12/22/2010)	Dec. 22, 2010	Dec. 22, 2010 PACER
34	MINUTES IN CHAMBERS by Judge Consuelo B. Marshall. On the Court's own motion, Scheduling Conference is hereby continued to Jan. 25, 2011 at 10:00 A.M. (lom) (Entered: 01/04/2011)	Jan. 4, 2011	Jan. 4, 2011 PACER
35	STIPULATION for Order Authorizing the California Department of Corrections to Produce Non-Psychiatric Medical Records of Plaintiffs Carlos Flores, Erick Nunez, Juan Carlos Sanchez and Juan Trinidad filed by Defendants Justin Bravo, County of Los Angeles, Daniel Cruz, Herman Delgado, Javier Guzman, Los Angeles Sheriff's Department, Andrew Lyons, Matt Onhemus, Carlos Ortega, Frank Quintana, Adrian Ruiz, Clayton Stelter. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Choi, Jin) (Entered: 01/06/2011) 1 Proposed Order View on PACER	Jan. 6, 2011	Jan. 6, 2011 PACER
36	ORDER AUTHORIZING THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS TO PRODUCE NON-PSYCHIATRIC MEDICAL RECORDS OF PLAINTIFFS by Magistrate Judge Andrew J. Wistrich, re Stipulation for Order, 35 . See document for details. (yb) (Entered: 01/07/2011)	Jan. 7, 2011	Jan. 7, 2011 PACER
37	NOTICE AND REQUEST of Settlement Procedure Selection (Sp1); parties request to Appear Before Magistrate Judge Andrew J. Wistrich for settlement proceedings. Filed by Plaintiffs Carlos Flores, Juan Trinidad (lom) (Entered: 01/26/2011)	Jan. 25, 2011	Jan. 25, 2011 PACER
38	ORDER by Judge Consuelo B. Marshall: Granted the NOTICE AND REQUEST of Settlement Procedure Selection (Sp1) to Appear Before Magistrate Judge Andrew J. Wistrich for settlement proceedings. For Settlement Procedure No. 1, counsel are responsible for contacting the judge or mediator at the appropriate time to arrange for further proceedings. (lom) (Entered: 01/26/2011)	Jan. 25, 2011	Jan. 25, 2011 PACER
39	MINUTES IN CHAMBER by Judge Consuelo B. Marshall. The matter before the Court is Defendants' Unenumerated F.R.C.P. Rule 12(b) Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint (the "Motion") 24 . The matter was heard by the Court on January 25, 2011. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants file a supplemental declaration detailing the administrative remedy scheme available to inmates at Men's Central Jail. Specifically, the evidence should address: (1) whether inmates must request an Inmate Complaint Form in order to access the administrative remedy scheme; (2) if regulations or a manual govern how the administrative remedy works and, if so, how inmates access those regulations and/or manual; and (3) what the procedural requirements of the administrative remedy scheme are, including time deadlines for filling out an Inmate Complaint Form after a grievance occurs. Defendants are also ORDERED to file with the Court any manual and/or regulations that govern how the administrative remedy scheme works at Men's Central Jail, if such manual and/or regulations exist. Defendants must file this supplemental evidence no later than February 7, 2011. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs submit evidence from the individual Plaintiffs as to why they did not comply with the Men's Central Jail administrative remedy scheme. Specifically, each individual Plaintiff should present evidence as to their "attempts" to exhaust administrative remedies relating to the alleged August 25, 2008 incident referenced in the First Amended Complaint. Plaintiffs must file this supplemental evidence no later than February 14, 2011. (lom) (Entered: 01/26/2011)	Jan. 25, 2011	Jan. 25, 2011 PACER
40	MINUTES of Status Conference held before Judge Consuelo B. Marshall. Status Conference held in lieu of a Scheduling Conference. Oral arguments held as to the Motion to Dismiss the First Amended Complaint 24 . The Motion to Dismiss, etc. shall remain under submission but the Court will issue a minute order as to further briefing. Court Reporter: Leandra Amber. (lom) (Entered: 01/27/2011)	Jan. 25, 2011	Jan. 25, 2011 PACER

Case: Rodriguez v. County of Los Angeles

2:10-cv-06342 | U.S. District Court for the Central District of California

Case Summary

People

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Resources

Docket

Case Details