Diaz v. Rojas
- Robert Illman
- 3:26-cv-04794
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 5
In Diaz v. Rojas, a judge of the Northern District of California screened a prisoner's civil rights complaint and ordered it served on Warden Cynthia Rojas while dismissing the state corrections department as immune from suit.
Prisoners in California state custody who file civil rights lawsuits in federal court challenging their conditions of confinement, particularly cell size; also relevant to understanding Eleventh Amendment immunity for state agencies.
What happened
In Diaz v. Rojas, No. 26-cv-04794-TLT, prisoner Sergio S. Diaz filed a civil rights lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Cynthia Rojas, the Warden of Correctional Training Facility (CTF), and the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR). Diaz, representing himself, claims that defendants violated his Eighth Amendment right to humane prison conditions by housing him in an unconstitutionally small cell, and he seeks money damages.
Because Diaz is a prisoner suing a government official, federal law required the court to screen the complaint before allowing it to proceed. During that screening, the court found that Diaz's allegations about inadequate living space were enough — when read generously — to state a valid Eighth Amendment claim against Warden Rojas. However, the court dismissed CDCR from the case entirely because, as a state agency, it is shielded from damages lawsuits in federal court under the Eleventh Amendment.
The court — whose signed name was not fully legible in the opinion — ordered the complaint to be formally served on Warden Rojas through CDCR's electronic service program. The case is currently stayed while the court considers whether to designate a related case as a 'bellwether' — a test case that would be litigated first to guide how similar related cases are handled. No further briefing is required from the parties until the court resolves that question.
The detailed version
- Diaz v. Rojas · No. 3:26-cv-04794
- Robert Illman
- Sept. 4, 2026
Background
Plaintiff Sergio S. Diaz, a prisoner at Correctional Training Facility (CTF), filed a pro se (self-represented) civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against two defendants: (1) Cynthia Rojas, identified as the Warden of CTF, and (2) the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR). Diaz alleges that defendants violated his Eighth Amendment rights by housing him in an unconstitutionally small cell, and he seeks money damages. The court noted that this case is related to a separate case, No. 25-cv-02820-TLT, raising similar or identical allegations.
Screening Standard
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, federal courts must screen any complaint in which a prisoner seeks relief from a governmental entity or official. The court must identify cognizable (legally valid) claims and dismiss those that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim, or seek money from a defendant who is immune from suit. Pro se pleadings are construed liberally. To survive screening, a complaint must allege facts plausible enough to raise a right to relief above a speculative level, not merely labels or legal conclusions. To state a § 1983 claim specifically, a plaintiff must allege (1) a violation of a right secured by the U.S. Constitution or federal law, and (2) that the violation was committed by a person acting under color of state law.
Rulings on Each Defendant
CDCR — Dismissed
The court dismissed CDCR as a defendant. Because CDCR is an agency of the State of California, it is protected by Eleventh Amendment immunity, which bars damages suits in federal court against state entities. The opinion does not specify whether this dismissal is with or without prejudice; it uses only the word "dismissed."
Warden Cynthia Rojas — Claim Survives; Service Ordered
The court found that Diaz's allegations, liberally construed, state a cognizable Eighth Amendment claim against Warden Rojas for inadequate living space. The Eighth Amendment requires that prison conditions meet the "minimal civilized measure of life's necessities," citing Rhodes v. Chapman, 452 U.S. 337, 347 (1981). The court ordered service of the complaint on Rojas through CDCR's electronic service program for prisoner civil rights cases.
Service and Procedural Steps
The court directed the Clerk of Court to serve CDCR via email with the complaint, the Order of Service, a CDCR Report of E-Service Waiver form, and a summons. CDCR has 40 days to report whether Rojas will waive formal service. If Rojas waives service, the California Attorney General's Office must file the waiver within 21 days of receiving CDCR's report, and Rojas will have 60 days from that report to file an answer. If Rojas does not waive service, the U.S. Marshals Service will serve her, and she will have 21 days after service to answer.
Stay Pending Bellwether Determination
Briefing is currently stayed while the court considers whether to designate a related case as a bellwether — a single test case litigated first to inform how a group of factually similar cases should be handled. If the court grants the bellwether motion, non-bellwether cases (potentially including this one) will remain stayed. If the court denies the motion, it will set individual briefing schedules in each related case.
Pro Se Obligations
The court reminded Diaz of his ongoing responsibilities as a self-represented litigant, including keeping the court informed of any address changes and serving copies of all filings on defendants or their counsel. Failure to maintain a current address may result in dismissal without prejudice under the Northern District's Local Rule 3-11.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.