Rivas v. Koenig

Background

Daniel Mendoza Rivas, a prisoner at Folsom State Prison, filed this civil-rights action without a lawyer under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He complained about events at the Correctional Training Facility in Soledad, California, from 2020 through 2022.

Rivas alleged that prison officials failed to follow or enforce California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation COVID-19 protocols, including masking and six-foot distancing. He alleged that these failures caused him and more than 2,700 other inmates to become infected. He also described being moved into a cell with people who had COVID-19, delayed testing and isolation, later outbreaks, and staff members who allegedly did not follow masking requirements.

Rivas further alleged that he developed asthma, was denied requests to see specialists, and submitted grievances that Defendant Martinez denied. He requested immediate release for professional mental-health treatment, a medical examination for COVID-related health issues, and payment of mental-health and medical expenses.

Screening and Claims

Because Rivas was a prisoner seeking relief from government officials, the court was required to screen the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Screening requires the court to identify claims that are frivolous, malicious, inadequately pleaded, or barred because they seek money from an immune defendant. The court also said that filings by people without lawyers must be read liberally.

The court concluded that, liberally construed, Rivas stated an Eighth Amendment claim against the two defendants for failing to enforce COVID-19 safety protocols from 2020 through 2022. The court applied the standard that a prison official violates the Eighth Amendment when the official knows of a substantial risk of serious harm and disregards that risk by failing to take reasonable steps to reduce it.

Order

The court ordered that the defendants at the facility be served through the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation’s electronic-service program for prisoner civil-rights cases. The order identified the defendants as former Warden Keenig and Warden Martinez and set procedures for waiving service or arranging service through the United States Marshals Service.

The court also ordered the defendants to file a motion for summary judgment or another dispositive motion no later than 60 days after service, unless they informed the court that the case could not be resolved through such a motion. The order set procedures for Rivas’s response and any reply, allowed discovery under the federal rules, and reminded Rivas that he must keep the court informed of address changes and follow court orders.

The court stated that Rivas would be granted permission to proceed without paying filing fees by separate order. This order was an initial screening and service order; it did not decide whether Rivas will ultimately prevail on his claim.

Names and Judge

The case caption identifies the defendant as Craig Koenig, while the body and conclusion of the order refer to the former warden as “Keenig.” The order is signed by Andis A. Westmore, although the supplied case metadata identifies Jon Tigar as the judge.