Israel v. Salinas

Background

Akiva Israel, a state prisoner proceeding without a lawyer, filed a civil-rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and was allowed to proceed without paying the filing fee. She alleged that prison officials failed to protect her from another inmate who threatened and sexually harassed her before attacking her on October 21, 2023. She also alleged that defendant Days treated her unequally because she is a transgender woman and Jewish, and she asserted related state-law and Americans with Disabilities Act claims.

Claims the Court Allowed to Proceed

The court determined that Israel’s allegations stated an Eighth Amendment failure-to-protect claim against Milton, Days, Pederson, Salinas, Castillo, Mancillas, Perez, Diaz, Muro, and Herrera. The court also determined that she stated an Equal Protection claim against Days. The court ordered service of those defendants and claims through the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation’s electronic service program, with United States Marshals Service involvement if necessary.

Claims and Defendants Not Yet Allowed to Proceed

The court ruled that Israel’s brief allegations against Lieutenant Poudry for ignoring information she presented did not state a claim. It also ruled that the allegations of verbal sexual harassment did not state a claim as presented, while allowing Israel to provide more information about whether the conduct was sufficiently serious or pervasive. The court further ruled that the brief disability-discrimination allegations did not state a claim. Several other defendants were identified without specific allegations against them. The remaining defendants and claims were dismissed with leave to amend, and Israel was given 28 days to file an amended complaint.

Discovery and Case Schedule

The court denied Israel’s motion to stay discovery without prejudice. It stated that discovery could begin once counsel for defendants appeared, and separately provided that discovery could be taken under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure without another court order. The court ordered defendants to file a summary-judgment motion or another dispositive motion no later than 60 days after service, and set deadlines for Israel’s opposition and any reply.

Disposition

The motion to stay discovery was denied without prejudice. Service was ordered on the specified defendants and claims. The remaining defendants and claims were dismissed with leave to amend. The court stated that if Israel did not amend, the case would continue only on the defendants and claims identified in the order.