text: Hello all... not sure if this is the best forum for this question, but here goes. A client recently brought in some old 2-track 15 ips masters for me to transfer to digital, and I'm not familiar with the longevity of this particular formulation. (For example, I _do_ know a bit about mid-80's 456 stickyness...) Has anyone had to "bake" this vintage/formulation, or is it robust? Thanks! Mark. Slaughterhouse Recording Studio


text:
Brenna Urban is urban art enthusiast and the owner of Urban Art Core – this is his story!
Jan Brennenstuhl, aka Brenna Urban, born 1988 in the Eastern-part of Berlin, Germany, grew up in between mortal remains of the real socialism and multicultural, subcultural ideas of squatting and creative designing of public space. Influenced by those two contrary mindsets, he started photographing street art in 2006 to document this breaking new, but totally temporary form of urban art.
Brenna Urban: Science vs. Art
Nowadays, he is a computer science master-student at University Potsdam by profession. By passion he is a priceless contribution to the graffiti scene with his international street art and graffiti blog www.urbanartcore.eu, which spreads the urban Berlin voice loud and clear to metropolises far and wide.
As founder and author of www.urbanartcore.eu, which launched in 2009 and has now become a well-known source for news about urban art forms and its artists, Brenna provides a platform of communication for both artists and enthusiasts alike, presenting international news about urban art activities, interventions, street art, urban-inspired design, exhibitions and a lot more goodies as well up to the last minute essential happenings.
His close knit, almost family bonds with prominent street artists from both Berlin and around the world including Buff Diss, Morten Andersen, FinDAC, Rallito X and Danny Doom naturally developed into a large collection of intimate photographs following studio visits and street actions of some of his, and our own favourite heroes. A virtual home was desperately needed for all the precious documentation so the portfolio www.urbanart-photography.eu was born.
Westberlin Gallery, June 2011

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Extended Stay America - Wichita - East
Select your stay dates to check availability at Extended Stay America - Wichita - East
Extended Stay America - Wichita - East
About the Hotel
Property Location
Located in Eastborough (East Wichita), Extended Stay America - Wichita - East is close to Towne East Square and McConnell Air Force Base. This hotel is within the vicinity of Kansas Aviation Museum and Great Plains Nature Center.
Make yourself at home in one of the 73 air-conditioned rooms featuring kitchens with full-sized refrigerators/freezers and stovetops. 32-inch flat-screen televisions with cable programming provide entertainment, while complimentary wireless Internet access keeps you connected. Conveniences include desks and separate sitting areas, as well as phones with free local calls.
Be sure to enjoy recreational amenities including a 24-hour fitness center and a seasonal outdoor pool. Additional amenities at this hotel include complimentary wireless Internet access and barbecue grills.
A complimentary continental breakfast is served daily.
Business, Other Amenities
Featured amenities include a 24-hour front desk, laundry facilities, and a safe deposit box at the front desk. Free self parking is available onsite.
Hotel Facilities
- Free breakfast
- 24-hour fitness facilities
- Free WiFi
- Outdoor seasonal pool
- Laundry facilities
- Elevator/lift
- Coffee/tea in common areas
- Barbecue grill(s)
- Total number of rooms - 73
- Free self parking
- Safe-deposit box at front desk
- Year Built 1997
- Smoke-free property
- Number of buildings/towers - 1
- 24-hour front desk
- Number of floors - 3
Room Facilities
- Microwave
- Stovetop
- Refrigerator
- Free local calls
- Coffee/tea maker
- Air conditioning
- Free WiFi
- Flat-panel TV
- Shower/tub combination
- Private bathroom
- Premium TV channels
- Phone
- Desk
- Hair dryer (on request)
- Free toiletries
- Weekly housekeeping provided
- Cookware, dishware, and utensils
- Iron/ironing board
- Full-sized refrigerator/freezer
- Cable TV service
- Kitchen
- Separate sitting area
- In-room climate control (air conditioning)
Hotel Policy
Know Before You Go
- Children 17 years old and younger stay free when occupying the parent or guardian's room, using existing bedding.
- The property allows pets in specific rooms only and has other pet restrictions (surcharges apply and can be found in the Fees section). Guests can arrange to bring pets by contacting the property directly, using the contact information on the booking confirmation.
The following fees and deposits are charged by the property at time of service, check-in, or check-out.
- Pet fee: USD 25 per pet, per day (maximum USD 150 per stay)
The above list may not be comprehensive. Fees and deposits may not include tax and are subject to change.
Mandatory Fees and Taxes
You'll be asked to pay the following charges at the property:
- Cash deposit: USD 100 per stay
We have included all charges provided to us by the property. However, charges can vary, for example, based on length of stay or the room you book.Show all hotel policy Show less hotel policy


text:
Click on Thumbnails to see full size images.
Please note that over time links change or are no longer online. This is known as link rot or
link decay.
As such, links may appear that were valid originally, but no longer are.
Images that the Drudge Report links to often expire
after several weeks, consequently we usually only display the original link, not the images
after serveral weeks. You can still click on the link to see if the original image is still available.
DrudgeReportArchive.com © 2016 [DMCA]
CT Inc.
Tag cloud phrases:air urinal beliefs linked group sues linked lower lower rates nyc orthodox rabbis sentenced real religious religious beliefs religious divorce religious group religious schools schools seeking seeking waivers sentenced prison shocking change strong religious sues san trip real women religious


text:
Introduce yourself to a stranger and strike up a conversation. Or, perhaps there is someone you've seen occasionally on the bus or in the neighborhood. Ask them how they're doing.
Make a new friend today! Whether you are in school, at work, playing a new sport, or studying at a coffee shop, go out of your way to say hello to someone new and start a conversation. Volunteer to show someone the ropes at school or at work. Get out of your comfort zone and say "hi!"
Everyone knows what it is like to be the new person at school, on the block, at work, or on the team. Maybe you are the new person right now. No matter which side of the situation you are on, it means a lot to have someone help you out and take that first step of saying hello. Reach out today--you might just make a new friend!
Make a goal for yourself: talk to one new person everyday this week. If it is someone you see often on your commute in the morning, pursue a conversation each time you see them. Or if it is someone at school sitting by themselves, invite them to come sit with you. Commit to speaking with one new person everyday for a week.
This can be a very daunting idea, particularly if you are a shy person. Try to commit to speaking with one new person this week. You could even send someone an email or simply smile at someone new and see if they start a conversation. Just be open to meeting someone new!
Has it been a while since you've met someone new? Here are some pointers for making new friends.


text:
This profile was last updated on .
Is this you? Claim your profile.
Direct Phone: (512) ***-****
+ Get 10 Free Contacts a Month
Please agree to the terms and conditions
I agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. I understand that I will receive a subscription to ZoomInfo Grow at no charge in exchange for downloading and installing the ZoomInfo Contact Contributor utility which, among other features, involves sharing my business contacts as well as headers and signature blocks from emails that I receive.
P.O. Box 234
Lawson, New South Wales 2783
Welcome to the Christian Digest online! In each issue we hope to inform, encourage, motivate and uplift our readers as we live life in this fallen world. To God be the glory! ... more
Board Member
Larry Monroe scholars out the first, ...
www.austinchronicle.com [cached]
Larry Monroe scholars out the first, morning man John Aielli inhabits all modes of the second, and last month's superb Armadillo soundtrack took care of the last ("In-a-Gadda-Da-Vida," yo).
Aliah Selah Home!
www.aliahselah.com [cached]
COVNA Nesletter 11/05
www.covna.org [cached]
COVNA Nesletter 11/06
www.covna.org [cached]
TUTTO Theatre Company: An Interview with Leegrid Stevens
www.tuttotheatre.org [cached]
Gino Aielli
CyberCoders Inc
Karen Aielli
Roto-Rooter Group Inc
Catherine Aielli
Fulton County Schools
Daniel Aielli
Summit Academy
Fabrizio Aielli
SEA SALT NAPLESâ€


text:
So -- what did you think about last night? Clearly for progressives and Democrats it was a mixed bag. A big win for the president, and for Tammy Baldwin. For the rest of the state, not such a great deal, as the state Senate fell firmly back into Republican hands. So - what do you think will happen in Wisconsin? Will the mining bill come roaring back to life? Will the right-wing assault on the state continue unabated, or will we get a breather? Did you like the election center on the site last night? Let us know!
Open Thread - What do you think about last night?
Recent Comments
Upcoming Events
- GrassRoots Organization of Waunakee meeting December 4, 2016
- League of Women Voters of Dane County December 7, 2016
- South Central Grassroots Alliance meeting December 8, 2016
- Green County Democrats & Progressives December 11, 2016
- GrassRoots Organization of Waunakee social December 11, 2016
- Grass Roots South Shore Meeting December 12, 2016
- South Central Wisconsin United to Amend December 13, 2016
- Drinking Liberally New Glarus December 15, 2016


text:
Fight Nerd reporter Hiroko Yamamura caught up with Chris Weidman at the UFC on Fox 2 press workout. Weidman will be meeting Demian Maia on the main card of the show, and spoke about how he expects to watch video >>
Download our iPhone app here http://www.mmafighting.com/iphone-download For more check out http://www.mmafighting.com watch video >>
Mike was on his way out of the arena at the conclusion of the post-fight press conference when Fighters Only managed to grab him for a quick word to get his thoughts about the fight, the result and watch video >>
Chael Sonnen talks to Fighters Only in his hotel room shortly after taking a decision win over Michael Bisping in the co-main event of the weekend's FOX card. watch video >>
MMA H.E.A.T. brings you the complete, unedited UFC on FOX Evans vs Davis pre-fight conference call with former light heavyweight champ Rashad Evans, Phil Davis, Chael Sonnen, Michael Bisping, Demian watch video >>
Mike Russow Juggling Life as a Chicago Cop, UFC Fighter watch video >>


text:
|Property type
|Minimum Stay
|3 - 7 nights
"Coronado Golf" A Bern Project completed in 2011. Coronado Golf is in this established Community of Coronado in Panama. Only approximately an hour from Panama City this New Bern Golf Project has stunning panoramic views of the Pacific Ocean, Punta Chame to Punta Barco, local mountains and the Tom Fazio Golf Course of 18 holes. Four high speed Elevators to your condo, underground parking, optional use of Golf Membership on some units. Membership use would be at the Coronado Beach and Golf Resort NOW "BLUE BAY RESORTS" where you will find restaurant, bar, large pool, spa, tennis courts and gym approximately one mile from the Coronado Golf Project. Coronado Golf is approximately 2 miles from the entrance of Coronado off the Pan American Highway where you can find 4 malls, 4 major markets, a variety of restaurants and lovely shops in this rapidly growing community. No restaurant on site at these condos a car is recommended for your stay. Kids are welcome and there is a playground for them to enjoy as well as the roof top pool and completed in ground pool and social area with pool with bohios, loungers, table and chairs.
Fully furnished with all the conveniences of home, Rent while you are searching for you place of your own or just enjoying your time here in Coronado, Panama! One Bedroom available, master has a King bed 2 baths, full kitchen, your own laundry as well. Cable and internet are included in your stay. This is a nice unit offered for rent.
Come and stay minimum of a week, a month or stay as long as you like, long term welcome. Prices vary with length of stay and time of year.
We have 3 1 bedroom units available for rent. Please inquire and give us your dates!
Keywords: Wonderful views of Coronado and the Pacific Ocean as far as the eye can see. 4 High Speed elevators and 33 apartment levels. Underground parking, roof top pool and Jacuzzi, gym, game room, children's pool and playground area on ground level . New in ground pool level with lounging and covered area with table and chairs, bohio and Hammock to relax in from the warm Panama sun.
A bright spacious unit with spectacular view. No problem with dogs or roosters as in previous unit.
Main disappointment was the size of the second bedroom and the separate bathroom. We would not be interested in this unit for a future visit if we were expecting guests. We understand there are full size two bedrooms available.
Unlike our previous unit, the direction of the rising sun made for a very hot unit before we got up in the morning. It was also very windy, which made opening the door sometimes hazardous. These are not things you can do anything about but are relevant.
Lots of opportunity for social interaction through happy hours. Moon parties at the beach club were paticularly enjoyable.
Optional use of Golf Membership at the Coronado Beach and Golf Resort approx 1 mile to Club House and Resort Hotel, allows use of large pool, gym, spa, restaurant and towel service. Some fees apply and renter will charge fees as used, no tab will be applied.
|Rate Period
|Weekend Night
|Monthly *
Panama Summer
Dec 1 2016 - Apr 30 2017
3 night minimum stay
My Standard Rate
7 night minimum stay
|Refundable damage deposit
This unit has a membership to the Coronado Golf and Beach resort if you would like to obtain this, inquire when checking availability to this condo and we will give you more details. Thank you, Martha
Deposit needed for reservation. Cancellation of 30 days before reservation if less than one month stay with no penalty. Cancellation of 90 days before reservation of more than one month stay with no penalty.
Cleaning fee and deposit in addition to rental quotes.
* Approximate monthly rate. Actual rate will depend on the days of the month you stay.


text:
"We bailed with the energy of men fighting for life." Sir Ernest Shackleton
With Englishman Robert Scott and Norwegian Roald Amundsen having reached the South Pole in 1912, Sir Ernest Shackleton, not to be outdone, embarked on the most ambitious polar expedition of all time – the Imperial Trans-Antarctic Expedition – a bid to cross Antarctica from the Weddell Sea coast to the Ross Sea coast.
On the Weddell Sea side, things did not go as planned, with his ship the Endurance becoming trapped and finally crushed by pack, leaving Shackleton and his crew with little hope of survival. They drifted north for five months from November 1915 to April 1916 until the melting ice finally released them into the Southern Ocean.
The 28 man crew of the Endurance paddled and sailed three small wooden lifeboats adrift in the roughest ocean in the world for several harrowing days to reach Elephant Island – a bleak and remote island home only to colonies of Elephant seals and penguins.
Race for survival – sea and mountains
What followed was what Sir Edmund Hillary described as the greatest survival story ever undertaken: Shackleton and five men left Elephant Island in late April 1916 on an 800-mile voyage across the notoriously treacherous Southern Ocean in the lifeboat James Caird.
For 17 days they battled constant gales, terrible cold, and mountainous seas in a leaking 22.5 ft wooden boat, managing to land on the small, remote island of South Georgia. Shackleton and two of the crew of six from the James Caird, Worsley and Crean, then climbed over the precipitous, heavily glaciated mountains of South Georgia to reach the refuge of the whaling station at Stromness on the other side.
All 28 men survive
Ultimately Shackleton was able to save the remaining crew of the James Caird on the other side of South Georgia and rescue all 22 of the crew members who had been left stranded on Elephant Island – an epic triumph of endurance and leadership.


text:
Where do I start? I'll start by saying….I'm going green and am starting my journey immediately! I'm already on the right track with eating healthy and getting rid of chemical-added cleaners within my home and garage. But after attending this Eco-Wellness Blog Conference put on by Leah S. at ShiftCon, I've gained more confidence to take the next steps. My info here is for the "intro", "first-timers to go green", etc. There was much info shared and some way over my head. Lots of activist and extremist shared their stories. Much was very touching.
ShiftCon was where shift happens (aka #ShiftHappens) alright…and am taking it all to heart. Brands were more than generous with their knowledge and their products. There was so much swag giving out, it was unreal. I will most definitely be spending my dollars with these companies first.
I met great influential people, such as Stacy Lyon from healthy hoo hoo – a brand owned by her that is "gentle care for down there". She was a hoot! AND including my roommate from Canada, Joyce – she blogs at http://theskinnypear.com.
So excited to be the winner of a 3-months supply of snacks from WAY BETTER SNACKS – they were so generous with their snacks – there wasn't a time where I didn't have a chip in my possession to snack on if needed. We already eat them in our home, so this is just an added benefit!! So look for these products at your grocery and you'll find that they are Certified GF, NONGMO Verified, 100% Whole Grains, Made in the USA. Thanks WAY BETTER SNACKS!!!
If you're wanting to go all green and can't fathom going all organic just yet, may I suggest started out by buying only products with the label that says NONGMO Verified. There's way too many preservatives in our foods, so watch buying can goods and packaged foods. Look for this sign on all packaging.
Baby steps is all it takes to start a greener life. It's worth it to you and to your children. Did you know that GMO's came into place in 1996? That means I, nor most of you did not grow up eating foods that were genetically modified, BUT our kids did and are now. Why this sort of activity is approved by the FDA, I do not know or understand. GMO – Genetically Modified Organism. Educate yourself on this topic…you'll be alarmed…just like the photo above says.
So, please follow along with me as I journey into greener pastures of eating organic, growing a garden for the first time, making my own all natural cleaning products (I've already started this), ridding my cabinets of all GMO foods, and learning more on how to save our environment of unwanted materials, such as plastics.
Be sure to watch for next year's ShiftCon Conference! In the meantime, follow #ShiftCon and #ShiftHappens for exciting news on this conference and next years'. Keep an eye out on my next "green" post for the "first-timers".


text:
TEEN TOP is here to tease with a MV clip for their upcoming title track!
The boys will be releasing their mini album 'TEEN TOP CLASS' on August 26th, featuring their title tune "Rocking" [Korean title "No Joke"].
The boys head to the beach at the start of what seems to be a peaceful video clip, except a fight erupts at the end!
Take a look above as you stay tuned for the full release!
SEE ALSO: [OP-ED] What makes a music video?


text:
The word oyster is used as a common name for a number of distinct groups of bivalve molluscs which live in marine or brackish habitats. The valves are highly calcified.
Oyster on Blogs
Related Ingredients
Oyster Video
Oyster Recipes
- Oysters Rockefeller Soup from Viking
- Sauteed Diver Sea Scallops with Oyster Mushrooms and Sweet Curried from Self
- cookie Oyster from Nabisco World
- Zesty lime oysters from Taste
- Chinese Broccoli With Ginger And Oyster Sauce from RecipeLover
- Oysters 3 Ways from Woolworths
- Bok Choy and Oyster Mushroom Stir Fry from Melissas
- Duo Of Australian Beef Oyster Blade Roasted Beef, Shiitake Mushroom Beef Pie, Asparagus, Pureed Celery Root And Papaya With Flavoured Jus from The Main Meal
Oyster Cookbooks
- Mr. Ed's Oyster Bar and Fish House now open in French Quarter ...
- The world is your oyster… | Do What You Love
- Breeding the perfect oyster? | wwltv.com New Orleans
- Big changes coming for Elliott's Oyster House - Seattle Times blogs
- Vibrio Illnesses Prompt Closure of Samish Bay's Oyster Harvest Until ...
- Oyster Stout: The Tricks for Making Beer with Mollusks | American ...
- Where To Celebrate National Oyster Day At Restaurants And Bars In ...


text:
Is this restaurant good for bar scene?
Does this restaurant have a TV?
Is this restaurant good for large groups?
Is this restaurant family-friendly?
Is this restaurant good for dining on a budget?
Is this a pub?
Is this restaurant good for dinner?
Are the prices at this restaurant mid-range / moderate?
Is this restaurant wheelchair accessible?
Is this restaurant good for lunch?
Thanks for helping!
I have eaten here since 1992. NEVER a bad experience. Better than bar food, but has that theme. Open round bar is cool and you never feel closed off, even when it is crowded.
The Chicken Lounge is a unique eatery and favorite with the locals for good reasons. They have a huge selection of beer both on tap and bottled and all the food is prepared on a grill in the center of the circular dining room. There is no deep-fryer here, just great grilled steak and chicken sandwiches, platters, good soups, wings,...
This is a favorite go to late night spot for my husband and I as they are open late in the kitchen. Good food and friendly wait staff! Nice beer selections too. All the food is grilled so no French fries but you'll get over it when you eat the nachos which can't be beat and must be tried. Order...
In a strip mall.. U would never know its there! We sat at the bar area. They have a grill in the middle so you can see them cook the food. Very nice staff and good food! We had the steak sand and chicken carbonara.
Great atmosphere. Good prices. Great location. Decor is special.
Good place to go with friends after work or for lunch. Service is fast..
Their wings are grilled instead of deep fried. The Mango Habanero are so very yummy. The Buffalo burgers are also delicious.
We had a diner over there. It was really perfect. Nice restaurant with friendly staff. Seat yourself and cooking on the restaurant floor so you can see what they do.
Extremely interesting place to kick back with not only chicken meals, but burgers, steaks - a decent variety. And all cooked in the center of the round bar - hot and fresh! You can watch the guys cooking while having a drink at the bar. Plenty of tables, booths - nice comfortable atmosphere. OUr meals were terrific! Highly recommend a...
This was our second visit once recommended by our nephew who lives in Allentown. It was excellent food both times. Today we had the nachos with chicken. It was loaded & I mean loaded with cheese. Very good. Chicken Carbonara is very good as well as Chicken Pesto. Service has always been very welcoming and attentive. A treasure hidden away...
This little place is a gem for great food and service. A friend lives in Allentown and when I visit him, we always go to The Chicken Lounge. The food is delicious and served with a smile. Would recommend this for a good meal anytime.
Own or manage this property? Claim your listing for free to respond to reviews, update your profile and much more.


text:
You didn't see this coming: Marmot's new ultralight composite Quark 30-degree bag, boasting a body-mapped combo of efficient synthetic insulation and 850-fill-power water-resistant down around the body, head and foot, will make even the burliest of campers swoon. Some of our favorite features include a fold-down second zipper for ventilation and a curved baffle construction to reduce shifting down. Stuff and storage sack included.
NOTE: Find in Store Inventory levels are continuously changing. Please contact store to confirm availability is as shown.
- Body Mapped- 850FP Down wraps around body, head, foot and super efficient Thermal R Micro on bottom
- Fold-Down Second Zipper Provides added Ventilation, Easy Access. Anti-Snag Slider reduces Snagging
- Anatomically Designed Footbox with Wrap-Around Construction increases Warmth
- EN Tested
- Full Length Locking YKK Two Way Zipper with Zip-Guard Slider
- Smooth-Curved Baffle Construction Reduces Down Shifting
- Nautilus Multi-Baffle Hood
- Down Defender to Improve Water-Resistance in Wet Conditions
- Smooth-Curved Baffle Construction Reduces Down Shifting
- Nautilus Multi-Baffle Hood
- Down Defender to Improve Water-Resistance in Wet Conditions
- 12d 100% Nylon Mini Ripstop .74 oz./yd. | 15d 100% Nylon Mini Ripstop .88 oz./yd.
- 1lbs 9oz (720g)
Shipping Info:
- Leaves the warehouse in 1-7 business days depending on order volume.
- Items may be returned within 60 days of the order date to an Atmosphere retail store or an Atmosphere warehouse. Items must be returned unused/unworn and electronics unopened. See Online Return Policy and Return Instructions for more information.
- Note: Shipping restrictions may apply based on location and product size.


text:
your bag
Your bag is empty.
Sorry, this product has sold out!
If you would like ARCHFASHION to try to and find it for you complete the form below.
Finders keepers ''hold up tank top'' colour : stripe the hold up tank is a sleeveless jersey tank with dropped armholes and an asymmetrically scooped hemline size & fit: model wears: size xs height: 173cm / 5' 6 bust: 33\" / 83.8cm waist: 24\" / 60.9 cm hips: 35.5\" / 90 cm


text:
DPS Highway Patrol
- SDPS bolsters school bus safety initiativessanmarcosrecord.com
- LDPS Bolsters School Bus Safety Effortslexingtonleader.com
- RDPS bolsters school bus safety effortsraymondville-chronicle.com
- 20 NAU Students and Faculty Rescued out of Snowy North Rim Region by Arizona Department of Public Safety's (DPS) Northern Air Rescuesedona.biz
Frequent names
Newstral's extraction of names of people and organisations from the world's news is completely automated. If you do not want your name to appear here, please contact us. We will be happy to look at your request.


text:
City Limits - Getting away from the hustle and bustle of the city, photographer David Cohen de Lara shoots these black and white portraits starring Eveline Rozing. The blonde looks cozy in a laid-back wardrobe of knitwear, jackets and trousers chosen by stylist April Jumelet. Designs from the likes of Weekday, Hunkydory and French Connection are highlighted in the … [Read more...]
Ania Yudina by David Cohen de Lara in "Neutral State" for Fashion Gone Rogue
Neutral State - Photographer David Cohen de Lara captures Ania Yudina in a wardrobe of lightweight pieces featuring neutral shades ranging from eggshell to nude. With art direction by Bianca Manzana de Agustin, Ania poses on the Spanish coast, wearing ethereal selects from the likes of Yolanda Cris, Gori de Palma and Andrés Sarda styled by April Jumelet. A natural look courtesy … [Read more...]
Irma by Catherine Conroy in Dear Darkness
Navigating the Belgian forest, photographer Catherine Conroy shoots Irma of Paparazzi in a story of luxe fashion paired with ominous surroundings. Styled by April Jumelet, the fiery redhead sports a wardrobe of sleek autumn looks in Dear Darkness. … [Read more...]


text:
Home /
Our Sources / About Us
/ FAQs /
Advanced Search
Not what you're
looking for? Try an advanced search.
Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.
Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.
November 29, 2011
UNITED STATES OF AMERICAv.HENRY THOMPSON
AND NOW, this 29th day of November, 2011, upon consideration of the correspondences (Docs. 127, 128) from defendant Henry Thompson ("Thompson"), wherein Thompson states that an irreconcilable conflict of interest has arisen between him and his court-appointed attorney Daniel Myshin, Esquire ("Attorney Myshin"), and after an ex parte hearing on the matter, during which Thompson requested the appointment of new counsel, and it appearing that irreconcilable differences have arisen between Thompson and Attorney Myshin, see 18 U.S.C. § 3006a(c) ("[T]he court may, in the interests of justice, substitute one appointed counsel for another at any stage of the proceedings."); United States v. Welty, 674 F.2d 185, 188 (3d Cir. 1982) (identifying "a complete breakdown in communication" or "an irreconcilable conflict with [one's] attorney" as cause for appointing substitute counsel); see also PA. RULES PROF'L CONDUCT R. 1.7, 1.16; UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA, CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT PLAN at 8 (2005), it is hereby ORDERED that:
1. The correspondences from defendant Thompson (Docs. 127, 128) are CONSTRUED as motions for the appointment of new counsel and are GRANTED as so construed.
2. The appointment of Daniel Myshin, Esquire, as counsel for defendant in the above-captioned case is TERMINATED.
3. William Fetterhoff, Esquire, Fetterhoff & Zilli, 218 Pine Street, P.O. Box 1161, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17108, telephone number (717) 232-7722, is appointed to represent defendant in the above-captioned case.
4. The Clerk of Court is directed to forward all necessary materials to William Fetterhoff, Esquire, as soon as possible.
5. Daniel Myshin, Esquire, is directed to provide to William Fetterhoff, Esquire, the file in the above-captioned case as soon as possible.
CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER United States District Judge
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.
Our website includes the main text of the court's opinion but does not include the
docket number, case citation or footnotes. Upon purchase, docket numbers and/or
citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a legal proceeding.
Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision.
Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.
Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.
LRC, Inc. About Us


text:
(877) 233-4885
7350 E Gold Dust Avenue,Scottsdale, AZ 85258 | Map
Newly Renovated Non Smoking Hotel in Old Town Scottsdale Nestled deep in the Sonoran Desert, Scot... Read More
3131 N Scottsdale Rd,Scottsdale, AZ 85251 | Map
Hotel in Old Town Scottsdale with Spacious Suites Nestled deep in the Sonoran Desert;Scottsdale i... Read More
(877) 233-4885
16630 N Scottsdale Road,Scottsdale, AZ 85254 | Map
Located near Arizona State Route 101, the Sleep Inn at North Scottsdale Road is two miles from th... Read More
(877) 233-4885
3275 N Drinkwater Boulevard,Scottsdale, AZ 85251 | Map
The Comfort Suites Old Town hotel is located steps from Old Town Scottsdale, the Osborn Medical C... Read More
7500 E Doubletree Ranch Rd,Scottsdale, AZ 85258 | Map
Escape to the stunning desert vistas of our Scottsdale luxury resort. Choose our incomparable Sco... Read More
7677 E Princess Blvd,Scottsdale, AZ 85255 | Map
Welcome to Scottsdale Resort. You'll love the year-round warm weather, abundant sunshine, scenic ... Read More
7350 East Gold Dust Avenue,Scottsdale, AZ 85258 | Map
Official site of Holiday Inn Express Scottsdale North. Stay Smart, rest, and recharge at Holiday ... Read More
7320 East Camelback Road,Scottsdale, AZ 85251 | Map
The Best Western Plus Sundial is a brand new hotel located in the heart of Old Town Scottsdale, A... Read More
9. Hampton Inn & Suites Scottsdale/riverwalkhamptoninn3.hilton.com
9550 E Indian Bend Rd,Scottsdale, AZ 85256 | Map
Experience a warm Scottsdale welcome at Hampton Inn & Suites Scottsdale-Riverwalk. While staying ... Read More
7515 E Butherus Dr,Scottsdale, AZ 85260 | Map
At the Best Western Plus Scottsdale Thunderbird Suites you're sure to find that little something ... Read More
11. Hilton Garden Inn Scottsdale North/perimeter Centerhiltongardeninn3.hilton.com
8550 E Princess Dr,Scottsdale, AZ 85255 | Map
The Hilton Garden Inn Scottsdale North/Perimeter Center, the closest north Scottsdale hotel to We... Read More
16620 N Scottsdale Rd,Scottsdale, AZ 85254 | Map
The Hampton Inn & Suites Phoenix/Scottsdale hotel is close to several Fortune 500 corporations, t... Read More
(877) 233-4885
5101 N Scottsdale Road,Scottsdale, AZ 85250 | Map
Clarion Hotel Scottsdale Arizona near Casino Arizona, Scottsdale Fashion Square mall in Old Town ... Read More
7300 E Gainey Suites Dr,Scottsdale, AZ 85258 | Map
All-suites luxury boutique hotel in the heart of exclusive Gainey Ranch. Stylish newly remodeled ... Read More
5101 N Scottsdale Rd,Scottsdale, AZ 85250 | Map
16. Courtyard Scottsdale at Mayo Clinic
13444 East Shea Boulevard,Scottsdale, AZ 85259 | Map
The Courtyard Scottsdale at Mayo Clinic is surrounded by the natural beauty of the Sonoran Desert... Read More
3311 North Scottsdale Road,Scottsdale, AZ 85251 | Map
Put yourself in the heart of sensational dining and shopping, along with vibrant nightlife, all w... Read More
6040 North Scottsdale Road,Scottsdale, AZ 85253 | Map
Book a stay at Residence Inn Scottsdale Paradise Valley, which features spacious, extended-stay s... Read More
6848 E Camelback Rd,Scottsdale, AZ 85251 | Map
Since its light first turned on in 1962, Motel 6 had been synonymous with great value travel. Our... Read More
7110 E Indian School Rd,Scottsdale, AZ 85251 | Map
2934 North Scottsdale Road,Scottsdale, AZ 85251 | Map
Book a room at the Rodeway Inn Oldtown Scottsdale hotel located in Scottsdale, Arizona. This pet ... Read More
10740 North 90th Street,Scottsdale, AZ 85260 | Map
Experience the West from TownePlace Suites Scottsdale, featuring spacious suites, free property-w... Read More
7677 East Princess Boulevard,Scottsdale, AZ 85255 | Map
Official site of Holiday Inn Club Vacations Scottsdale Resort. A family vacation resort with spac... Read More
7200 N Scottsdale Rd,Scottsdale, AZ 85253 | Map
Welcome to the Scottsdale Plaza Resort in beautiful Scottsdale Arizona.
Set on 40 beauti... Read More
4949 E. Lincoln Drive,Scottsdale, AZ 85253 | Map
The Omni Scottsdale Resort & Spa at Montelucia is an award-winning resort nestled at the foot of ... Read More
5201 North Pima Road,Scottsdale, AZ 85250 | Map
Our culturally rich hotel offers unique decor that embodies the spirit of gathering - perfect for... Read More
7575 E Princess DR,Scottsdale, AZ 85255 | Map
The AAA Five-Diamond Fairmont Scottsdale Princess has come to reflect the dynamic environment tha... Read More
6935 E 5th Ave,Scottsdale, AZ 85251 | Map
3311 N Scottsdale Rd,Scottsdale, AZ 85251 | Map
7325 East 3rd Avenue,Scottsdale, AZ 85251 | Map
Immerse yourself in the luxury of Scottsdale Marriott Suites Old Town. Our all-suite hotel is jus... Read More


text:
Ad blocker interference detected!
Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers
Wikia is not accessible if you've made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.
I found this article on vanityfair.com and it just made me so happy, I really hope now that cartoon in general do not hold back and push the envelope even further. The fact that Korra is so ground breaking is just wonderful!Read more >


text:
Sound Physicians
Manchester, Connecticut
Full Time
The Team - The Hospital
Experience an outstanding quality of life and income while working in a center that is dedicated to patient care. This opportunity features two established hospitalist programs in a health care system serving 19 towns in eastern Connecticut. Enjoy practicing medicine in the 400+ bed facilities that provides comprehensive health care services. With state-of-the-art medical technologies, they are able provide more convenient access to a wider range of health care services, that allow them to continue to exceed the expectations of patients and the communities surrounding. This hospital's daily mission is to improve the patient's well-being by providing high-quality, compassionate healthcare through their commitment to Caring, Teamwork, Respect and Communication.
•Join a 20 hospitalist team delivering quality care in this community
•Help the quality care focused physicians of the future by working at an academic affiliated facility
•Practice with a physician-led organization offering a sustainable career with programs consistently staffed to levels that facilitate manageable encounters
•Take advantage of the investment Sound Physicians makes into developing our hospitalist colleagues as leaders in hospital medicine
•By adopting our strong core values develop into a Sound Physicians Partner
•Residents welcome to apply
Location and Lifestyle
Imagine living in an authentic large town with a small town home feel. Located northeast of the capital, Hartford, you are exposed to the wonderful historic buildings and central business district, but also the 1,000 acres of park land and gardens. You will be in a great central location that allows you to travel to New York City or Boston in just a couple of hours. There is a range of housing styles and prices in attractive neighborhoods, an award-winning school system, performing arts organizations, libraries and friendly, community-spirited residents. Enjoy the benefits of a comfortable, suburban community with excellent area schools. Conveniently located just below the Massachusetts border, in the heart of beautiful scenic New England, both towns provide easy access to highways, Bradley International Airport, New York City, and Boston.
To learn more about this opportunity please contact Ben Housley at 615-483-1809 or email at firstname.lastname@example.com. All inquiries held in confidence.
Sorry, this is NOT an opportunity for Search Firm recruiters.
Thank you.


text:
Home /
Our Sources / About Us
/ FAQs /
Advanced Search
Not what you're
looking for? Try an advanced search.
Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.
Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.
July 21, 2008
GARY B. MOORE, CDCR #F-17016, PLAINTIFF,v.CALIPATRIA STATE PRISON; T T. OCHOA, CHIEF DEPUTY WARDEN; AND N. GRANNIS, CHIEF INMATE APPEAL, J. ANAYA, CC II COUNSEL; DEFENDANTS.
ORDER: (1) DENYING MOTION TO APPOINT COUNSEL WITHOUT PREJUDICE [Doc. No. 10]; (2) DENYING MOTION FOR EMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER [Doc. No. 12]; (3) SUA SPONTE DISMISSING FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR FAILING TO STATE A CLAIM PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2) & 1915A(b)
On May 13, 2008, Gary B. Moore ("Plaintiff"), a state prisoner currently incarcerated at Calipatria State Prison located in Calipatria, California and proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff did not prepay the $350 filing fee mandated by 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a); instead, he filed a Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis ("IFP") pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) [Doc. No. 2], as well as a Motion to Appoint Counsel [Doc. No. 3]. This Court granted Plaintiff's Motion to Proceed IFP, denied Plaintiff's Motion for Appointment of Counsel and sua sponte dismissed his Complaint for failing to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. See June 13, 2008 Order at 7-8. Nonetheless, the Court permitted Plaintiff leave to file an Amended Complaint to correct the deficiencies of pleading identified in the Court's Order. Id. On June 27, 2008, Plaintiff filed his First Amended Complaint ("FAC") [Doc. No. 8], a second Motion for Appointment of Counsel [Doc. No. 10], and a Motion for Temporary Restraining Order [Doc. No. 12].
Plaintiff requests the appointment of counsel to assist him in prosecuting this civil action. The Constitution provides no right to appointment of counsel in a civil case, however, unless an indigent litigant may lose his physical liberty if he loses the litigation. Lassiter v. Dept. of Social Services, 452 U.S. 18, 25 (1981). Nonetheless, under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1), district courts are granted discretion to appoint counsel for indigent persons. This discretion may be exercised only under "exceptional circumstances." Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991). "A finding of exceptional circumstances requires an evaluation of both the 'likelihood of success on the merits and the ability of the plaintiff to articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved.' Neither of these issues is dispositive and both must be viewed together before reaching a decision." Id. (quoting Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 1331 (9th Cir. 1986)).
The Court deniesPlaintiff's request without prejudice, as neither the interests of justice nor exceptional circumstances warrant appointment of counsel at this time. LaMere v. Risley, 827 F.2d 622, 626 (9th Cir. 1987); Terrell, 935 F.2d at 1017.
Plaintiff has filed a "Motion Temporary Restraining Order " [Doc. No. 12], along with an affidavit in support of his Motion.
Rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that: A temporary restraining order may be granted without written or oral notice to the adverse party or that party's attorney only if (1) it clearly appears from specific facts shown by affidavit or by the verified complaint that immediate and irreparable injury, loss, or damage will result to the applicant before the adverse party or that party's attorney can be heard in opposition, and (2) the applicant's attorney certifies to the court in writing the efforts, is any, which have been made to give the notice and the reasons supporting the claim that notice should not be required.
FED.R.CIV.P. 65(b).
Plaintiff's Motion for Temporary Restraining Order does not comply with Rule 65(b)'s important procedural notice requirement. Here, Plaintiff has not demonstrated that his First Amended Complaint, or his Motion have been served on any named Defendant. And while Defendants, as employees of the CDCR, may ultimately be represented by the Attorney General in this matter, there has been no appearance on any Defendant's behalf by the Attorney General at this preliminary stage of the proceedings. Moreover, Plaintiff has not submitted a sworn affidavit or declaration certifying that any efforts have been made to give notice of his Motion or First Amended Complaint to any named Defendant, which is required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(b).
As noted above, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(b), a TRO may be granted without notice to the adverse party or that party's attorney only if "it clearly appears from specific facts shown by affidavit or by the verified complaint that immediate and irreparable injury, loss, or damage will result to the applicant before the adverse party or that party's attorney can be heard in opposition." FED.R.CIV.P. 65(b). Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(b) also requires the Plaintiff to certify to the Court "the efforts, if any, which have been made to give the notice and the reasons supporting the claim that notice should not be required." Id. Plaintiff has not provided the Court with any reasoning why Defendants have not been notified of Plaintiff's request for a preliminary injunction.
Plaintiff's Motion does not comply with these elemental procedural requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(b). Thus, for all these reasons, the Court must DENY without prejudice Plaintiff's Motion for Temporary Restraining Order [Doc. No. 12] pursuant to FED.R.CIV.P. 65(b).
III. SUA SPONTE SCREENING PER 28U.S.C.§§1915(e)(2) & 1915A
As stated in the Court's previous Order, the Prison Litigation Reform Act ("PLRA") obligates the Court to review complaints filed by all persons proceeding IFP and by those, like Plaintiff, who are "incarcerated or detained in any facility [and] accused of,0 sentenced for, or adjudicated delinquent for, violations of criminal law or the terms or conditions of parole, probation, pretrial release, or diversionary program," "as soon as practicable after docketing." See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2) and 1915A(b). Under these provisions, the Court must sua sponte dismiss any IFP or prisoner complaint, or any portion thereof, which is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim, or which seeks damages from defendants who are immune. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B) and 1915A; Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1126-27 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc) (§ 1915(e)(2)); Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 446 (9th Cir. 2000) (§ 1915A).
Before amendment by the PLRA, the former 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) permitted sua sponte dismissal of only frivolous and malicious claims. Lopez, 203 F.3d at 1126, 1130. An action is frivolous if it lacks an arguable basis in either law or fact. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 324 (1989). However 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2) and 1915A now mandate that the court reviewing an IFP or prisoner's suit make and rule on its own motion to dismiss before effecting service of the Complaint by the U.S. Marshal pursuant to FED.R.CIV.P. 4(c)(2). Id. at 1127 ("[S]section 1915(e) not only permits, but requires a district court to dismiss an in forma pauperis complaint that fails to state a claim."); see also Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir. 1998) (discussing 28 U.S.C. § 1915A).
"[W]hen determining whether a complaint states a claim, a court must accept as true all allegations of material fact and must construe those facts in the light most favorable to the plaintiff." Resnick, 213 F.3d at 447; Barren, 152 F.3d at 1194 (noting that § 1915(e)(2) "parallels the language of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6)"). In addition, the Court's duty to liberally construe a pro se's pleadings, see Karim-Panahi v. Los Angeles Police Dept., 839 F.2d 621, 623 (9th Cir. 1988), is "particularly important in civil rights cases." Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1261 (9th Cir. 1992).
Section 1983 imposes two essential proof requirements upon a claimant: (1) that a person acting under color of state law committed the conduct at issue, and (2) that the conduct deprived the claimant of some right, privilege, or immunity protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States. See 42 U.S.C. § 1983; Parratt v. Taylor, 451 U.S. 527, 535 (1981), overruled on other grounds by Daniels v. Williams, 474 U.S. 327, 328 (1986); Haygood v. Younger, 769 F.2d 1350, 1354 (9th Cir. 1985) (en banc).
B. Eighth Amendment Claims - Failure to Protect
Here, Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint is, once again, subject to sua sponte dismissal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) because it fails to state an Eighth Amendment claim. See Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 834 (1994). Like his original Complaint, Plaintiff alleges that his disability has caused "major problems and arguments and even fights with cellmates." (FAC at 3.)
The Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment requires that prison officials act reasonably in protecting inmates from violence suffered at the hands of other prisoners. Farmer, 511 U.S. at 833; Berg v. Kincheloe, 794 F.2d 457, 459 (9th Cir. 1986). However, to state a failure to protect claim, Plaintiff must allege facts sufficient to show that Defendants were "deliberately indifferent," that they were aware of, but nevertheless consciously disregarded an excessive risk to his health or safety. Farmer, 511 U.S. at 834. If the official is not alleged to have actual knowledge of a serious risk of harm, but is alleged to be aware of facts from which the inference could be drawn that a substantial risk of serious harm exists, the plaintiff must further allege that the official "also dr[ew] the inference." Id. at 837; Wilson v. Seiter, 501 U.S. 294, 303 (1991). Here, as before, Plaintiff fails to identify any specific serious risk to his safety that was known to correctional officers. Plaintiff makes vague allegations of "attacks" and "fist fights" but he does not set forth any specific threats known to either Plaintiff or prison officials. Moreover, he acknowledges that Defendant Catlett attempted to assist him by filing complaints against these other inmates which Plaintiff refused to do. (FAC at 3.) Without pleading such facts, Plaintiff cannot show that any Defendant acted with conscious disregard to a risk to his safety. See Farmer, 511 U.S. at 837; Johnson v. Duffy, 588 F.2d 740, 743 (9th Cir. 1978) (to establish a deprivation of a constitutional right by any particular individual, the plaintiff must allege that the individual, in acting or failing to act, was the actual and proximate cause of his injury).
Thus, Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment failure to protect claims are dismissed for failing to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. If Plaintiff chooses to amend his pleading, he must identify how each named Defendant was responsible for the alleged constitutional violations.
C. Eighth Amendment - Medical care claims
In addition, Plaintiff alleges that "prison officials know" about his medical disability but "have failed to respond responsibly to it." (FAC at 5.) Where a prisoner's Eighth Amendment claim is one of inadequate medical care, the prisoner must allege "acts or omissions sufficiently harmful to evidence deliberate indifference to serious medical needs." Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 106 (1976). Such a claim has two elements: "the seriousness of the prisoner's medical need and the nature of the defendant's response to that need." McGuckin v. Smith, 974 F.2d 1050, 1059 (9th Cir. 1991), overruled on other grounds by WMX Techs., Inc. v. Miller, 104 F.3d 1133, 1136 (9th Cir. 1997). A medical need is serious "if the failure to treat the prisoner's condition could result in further significant injury or the 'unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain.'" McGuckin, 974 F.2d at 1059 (quoting Estelle, 429 U.S. at 104). Indications of a serious medical need include "the presence of a medical condition that significantly affects an individual's daily activities." Id. at 1059-60. By establishing the existence of a serious medical need, a prisoner satisfies the objective requirement for proving an Eighth Amendment violation. Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 834 (1994).
Here, the Court finds that Plaintiff's allegations he had been shot previously which led to back problems sufficient show that his medical needs were serious enough to satisfy the objective component of an Eighth Amendment violation. See McGuckin, 974 F.3d at 1059-60; Farmer, 511 U.S. at 834.
However, while Plaintiff has alleged facts sufficient to establish the existence of a serious medical need, he must also allege that each Defendant's response to his need was deliberately indifferent. Farmer, 511 U.S. at 834. In general, deliberate indifference may be shown when prison officials deny, delay, or intentionally interfere with a prescribed course of medical treatment, or it may be shown by the way in which prison medical officials provide necessary care. Hutchinson v. United States, 838 F.2d 390, 393-94 (9th Cir. 1988). Before it can be said that a prisoner's civil rights have been abridged with regard to medical care, however, "the indifference to his medical needs must be substantial. Mere 'indifference,' 'negligence,' or 'medical malpractice' will not support this cause of action." Broughton v. Cutter Laboratories, 622 F.2d 458, 460 (9th Cir. 1980) (citing Estelle, 429 U.S. at 105-06). See also Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1060 (9th Cir. 2004). Here, Plaintiff has failed to identify any Defendant which he claims is responsible for denying his medical care. Moreover, Plaintiff does not sufficiently allege the specific medical care which he claims he is being denied. Without more, the Court finds Plaintiff is unable to allege facts sufficient to state an Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference to a serious medical need claim.
D. ADA Claims
Finally, Plaintiff, although it is not entirely clear, appears to be attempting to state a claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA"). (See FAC at 3.) Title II of the ADA broadly prohibits discrimination by public entities against individuals with disabilities: "[N]o qualified individual with a disability shall, by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of a public entity, or be subjected to discrimination by any such entity." 42 U.S.C. § 12132. The prohibitions of the ADA apply to state prisons. See Pennsylvania Dep't of Corrections v. Yeskey, 524 U.S. 206, 118 S.Ct. 1952, 1954 (1998); Armstrong v. Wilson, 124 F.3d 1019, 1023 (9th Cir. 1997).
The Ninth Circuit set out the elements of a claim under Title II of the ADA in Thompson v. Davis, 295 F.3d 890 (9th Cir. 2002):
To state a claim of disability discrimination under Title II, the plaintiff must allege four elements: (1) the plaintiff is an individual with a disability; (2) the plaintiff is otherwise qualified to participate in or receive the benefit of some public entity's services, programs, or activities; (3) the plaintiff was either excluded from participation in or denied the benefits of the public entity's services, programs, or activities, or was otherwise discriminated against by the public entity; and (4) such exclusion, denial of benefits, or discrimination was by reason of the plaintiff's disability.
Id. at 895 (citing Weinrieich v. L.A. County Metro. Transp. Auth., 114 F.3d 976, 978 (9th Cir. 1997)). However, Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint fails to allege any of these factors. Accordingly, Plaintiff's claims brought pursuant to the ADA are dismissed for failing to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
Good cause appearing therefor, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiff's Motion for Appointment of Counsel [Doc. No. 10] is DENIED.
2. Plaintiff's Motion for Temporary Restraining Order [Doc. No. 12] is DENIED without prejudice for failing to comply with FED.R.CIV.P. 65(b).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:
3. Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(b) and 1915A(b). However, Plaintiff is GRANTED forty five (45) days leave from the date this Order is filed in which to file a Second Amended Complaint which cures all the deficiencies of pleading noted above. Plaintiff's Amended Complaint must be complete in itself without reference to the superseded pleading. See S.D. CAL. CIVLR 15.1.
Defendants not named and all claims not re-alleged in the Amended Complaint will be considered waived. See King v. Atiyeh, 814 F.2d 565, 567 (9th Cir. 1987).
Further, if Plaintiff's Amended Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, it may be dismissed without further leave to amend and may hereafter be counted as a "strike" under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). See McHenry v. Renne, 84 F.3d 1172, 1177-79 (9th Cir. 1996).
© 1992-2008 VersusLaw Inc.
Our website includes the main text of the court's opinion but does not include the
docket number, case citation or footnotes. Upon purchase, docket numbers and/or
citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a legal proceeding.
Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision.
Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.
Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.
LRC, Inc. About Us


text:
Free Vodka At The Airport To All Comers [Pic]
I"m pretty sure this is illegal… how did she not get tackled by air marshals or police?
Submitted by: fancylad
LBC bon vivant, short skirt historian, born-again empathizer, rock n' roll raconteur and first-and-foremost a family tripper.
- Web |
- More Posts (18336)


text:
For your convenience, the Lakewood-Trumbull Y provides Program Guides, Group Exercise Class and Gym Schedules in a PDF format. Easy for you to check or print. Schedules are subject to change due to program changes, low class enrollment or special events. Current information can be obtained by calling our Member Service Staff Team at the Branch P 203 445 9633.
LWT Y 2017 Winter 1 Program Guide
LWT Y 2016 Fall 2 Program Guide
LWT Y 2016 Basketball Court Schedule Fall 2016
CCC YMCA Swim Lesson Levels and Descriptions
Have you participated in one of our fitness classes yet? Or just need to remember the class time or instructors name? We keep PDF versions handy right here. Come on in for a great workout with some of the best instructions. With a variety of classes, you are sure to find one that you like and is convenient for your schedule.
LWT Y Fall Group Exercise Schedule
LWT Y Holiday Week Group Exercise Schedule
We require a Liability Waiver for individuals participating in our Open Gymnastics. Please fill out the attached and bring it to the Branch.
Healthy Lifestyle Program
Learn more about our Healthy Lifestyle Program for positive, healthy and lifelong change. Register for an upcoming information session on-line, at the Branch or by calling us. Join the YMCA Healthy Lifestyle program to adopt and maintain a healthy lifestyle by eating healthier, increasing physical activity, and weight loss.
Information sessions are held each Wednesday at 6:00pm and on Friday at noon.


text:
Azul Fives Hotel by Karisma
Predio El Limonar Fraccion 2 Xcalacoco Municipio De Solidaridad Playa Del Carmen Quintana Roo, Playa del Carmen, Mexico Show Map
Check in from 3:00 PM / Check out prior to 12:00 AM
Azul Fives Hotel by Karisma: Find photos, reviews, information, amenities and compare prices for 5 stars hotels in Playa del Carmen, Mexico.
Featuring a sauna, an outdoor pool and a Jacuzzi, Azul Fives Hotel by Karisma is located in Playa del Carmen and offers elegant accommodation. The various facilities this unique hotel has to offer include a kids pool, a kids club and an express check-in and check-out feature.
Hotel description
Each elegant room at Azul Fives Hotel by Karisma offers wireless internet access and all the essentials for a comfortable stay. There are also a number of rooms especially for families.
Azul Fives Hotel by Karisma provides breakfast every morning that guests can enjoy before heading out to discover the surrounding region.
Cancun International Airport is under a 40-minute drive from the hotel. The helpful staff at the tour desk are available to book tours and sightseeing trips in Playa del Carmen.
Hotel features
Room Service
Concierge, Elevator / Lift, 24 Hour Reception, Dry Cleaning, Babysitting / Child Services, Conference Room(s), Currency Exchange, Multilingual Staff, Safe-Deposit Box, Meeting Rooms, Laundry service, Shops, Luggage Storage, Express Check-In/Check-Out
Fitness Room/Gym, Swimming pool, Tour Desk, Massage / Beauty Centre, Sauna, Garden, Volleyball, Jacuzzi, Massage, Spa & Wellness Centre, Pool Outdoor
Internet Connection (wireless)
Nightclubs, Child Pool, Kids Club, Games Available, Souvenirs/Gift Shop
Availability and Prices
Booking Site
Room Type
Per room
Per night
Per night
Users who viewed Azul Fives Hotel by Karisma also viewed these 5 stars Playa del Carmen hotels:
Romantic Caribbean Hideaway
Primera Avenida y Calle 26, Playa del Carmen
Primera Avenida y Calle 26, Playa del Carmen
Pueblito Luxury Condo Hotel Playa del Carmen
Avenida 38 Norte S/N Entre Flamingos y Albatros Col Centro, Playa del Carmen
Avenida 38 Norte S/N Entre Flamingos y Albatros Col Centro, Playa del Carmen
Sandos Riviera Select Club
Paseo Xaman-ha Lote 2 Mza 2 Frac, Playa del Carmen
Paseo Xaman-ha Lote 2 Mza 2 Frac, Playa del Carmen
Search hotels
based on
2934 reviews
Nearest hotels
- Playa del Carmen Resort & Spa
0 miles
- Turquesa Riviera Maya
0.1 miles
- Aldea Kamafruta
0.1 miles


text:
You will Fall in Love with this Child – Guaranteed!
Judah's funny, full of life, joyful and silly. And you are going to fall in love with him — guaranteed!Continue Reading ›
Who Doesn't Like Cute Baby Pictures?
How can anyone not like cute baby pictures? Especially when babies are such great reminders of what's most important in life.Continue Reading ›
Rejoice in Suffering
When we look for the source of our troubles, let's not forget that God has allowed them to refine our lives. God uses them for good, even if Satan or anyone else intends it for bad.
Remember the Best
Pleasant memories are a choice that you must make. This will bring you joy!
Unbridled Joy
When exactly does that happen — that our joy is snuffed out, stuffed down or smothered? What happens to stifle that unspeakable joy that used to well up at the slightest provocation?
Staying Attached
Sometimes, it's easy to fall more in love with doing the ministry than with the one who called us. And it's easy to get tired or burned out doing the routine or difficult tasks.
The Key That Unlocks
For the children we serve, Satan wants to convince them that the absence of material wealth equals the absence of love from a heavenly father. For you and me in the developed world, it might be just as loud, but for different reasons.
Bringing Joy: My Best Day in Ministry
Kenneth Kataryeba, a learning and support specialist for East Africa, shares the story of a girl in a wheelchair whom he just met, and how bringing joy to children and helping lift them from the misery of poverty is how he really gets paid.


text:
Home /
Our Sources / About Us
/ FAQs /
Advanced Search
Not what you're
looking for? Try an advanced search.
Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.
Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.
February 2, 2012
JIMMIE STEPHEN, PLAINTIFF,v.FEDERAL RECEIVER J.C. KELSO, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
ORDER and FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding without counsel and in forma pauperis,*fn1 in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The action proceeds against defendant physicians Hsieh and Traquina, pursuant to plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint. (Dkt. No. 22.) Plaintiff initiated this action while he was incarcerated at California State Prison-Solano.
Plaintiff was recently transferred to San Quentin State Prison. Several matters are pending.*fn2
Addressed herein are the following: (1) defendants' motion to dismiss defendant Traquina from this action, and to dismiss plaintiff's damages claims against both defendants in their official capacities; (2) plaintiff's motion to strike the affirmative defenses set forth in defendant Hsieh's answer to the complaint; (3) plaintiff's motion to strike discovery propounded on him by defendant Hseih; (4) plaintiff's request to file a proposed supplemental complaint; and (5) plaintiff's motions for preliminary injunctive relief.
For the reasons set forth below, the court orders that: plaintiff's motion to strike the affirmative defenses set forth in defendant Hsieh's answer to the Second Amended Complaint is denied; plaintiff's motion to strike defendant Hsieh's discovery requests is granted, without prejudice to the discovery requests being later propounded; and plaintiff's motion for issuance of an order to show cause is denied. Additionally, the undersigned recommends that: defendants' motion to dismiss be granted in part and denied in part -- the court should dismiss plaintiff's damages claims against defendants in their official capacities, but deny defendants' motion to dismiss defendant Traquina from this action; plaintiff's motions for preliminary injunctive relief should be denied; plaintiff's request for leave to file his proposed Amended Supplemental Complaint should be granted, and Dr. Wenneker should be added as a defendant in this action; and plaintiff should be granted leave to file, within twenty-eight (28) days after the filing date of the district judge's order, a comprehensive Third Amended Complaint against defendants Hsieh, Traquina and Wenneker. //// ////
I. Introduction
Pursuant to the operative Second Amended Complaint ("SAC" or "complaint") (Dkt. No. 22), plaintiff alleges that, since he arrived at California State Prison-Solano ("CSPSOL"), on November 14, 2008, he complained of stomach pains to his assigned physician, Dr. Hsieh, and repeatedly requested a colonoscopy. Plaintiff alleges that Dr. Hsieh unreasonably denied plaintiff's requests for a colonoscopy ("on 12-1-09, 2-5-10, 3-5-10 and 3-8-10" (id. at 6)), until June 7, 2010, when plaintiff obtained his first colonoscopy. The colonoscopy was performed by Dr. Sogge, who removed two polyps during the procedure, but determined that a third polyp was "so large" that plaintiff needed to be scheduled for "emergency" surgery (a colectomy resection), which Dr. Sogge allegedly sought to schedule on June 14, 2010. (Id. at 3,
6.) Plaintiff complains that it took Dr. Hsieh "45 days"*fn3
to arrange for this "emergency" surgery, which was performed
on July 21, 2010, by Dr. Wenneker, at Queen of the Valley Hospital,
and required the removal of six inches of plaintiff's colon. (Id.)
(The administrative appeal on this matter indicates that plaintiff was
seen at the hospital on June 22, 2010, for a surgical consultation,
and that he was hospitalized for the surgery from July 20, 2010, until
July 26, 2010. (Dkt. No. 36 at 6-7, 13.))
The remaining allegations of the Second Amended Complaint are less clear. Plaintiff appears to allege that, after his July 2010 surgery, it was recommended that he have "further surgery" (or a follow-up visit) "within 90 days from 10-12-10," "by 'Dr. Wenneker' of 'Angel Mercy Hospital.'" (Dkt. No. 22 at 3, 5, 6.) In his opposition to the motion to dismiss, plaintiff states that he "'finally saw Dr. Lee' on 2-16-11 when 'requested' and 'right' to 'monthly visits' after 7-21-10 'serious surgery' . . . ." (Dkt. No. 36 at 16.)
Although the Second Amended Complaint asserts a violation of plaintiff's rights under the Fifth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments (Dkt. No. 22 at 8), the court has construed the complaint to state only a potentially cognizable Eighth Amendment claim for deliberate indifference to plaintiff's serious medical needs. (Dkt. No. 23 at 1-2 ("based on plaintiff's allegations that a diagnostic colonoscopy was improperly delayed and, once it was completed and formed the basis of a physician-recommended 'urgent' surgery, that plaintiff's colon surgery was improperly delayed, resulting in the loss of a portion of plaintiff's colon and the possibility of further surgery").
Pursuant to the Second Amended Complaint, plaintiff sues defendants Hsieh and Traquina in both their individual and official capacities. Plaintiff seeks ten million dollars ($10,000,000) in compensatory damages, an indefinite amount of punitive damages, and broadly seeks "declaratory and injunctive relief." (Dkt. No. 22 at 3, 8.)
On November 21, 2011, plaintiff filed a Notice of Change of Address informing the court that he had been moved to San Quentin State Prison ("San Quentin"). (Dkt. No. 50.)
II. Defendants' Motion to Dismiss
Defendants move to dismiss defendant Traquina from this action, on the ground that plaintiff's only claim against Dr. Traquina, an Eighth Amendment claim for deliberate indifference to serious medical needs, is impermissibly premised on Dr. Traquina's alleged "supervisory liability." In addition, defendants move to dismiss plaintiff's claim for monetary damages against both defendants in their official capacities, on the ground that it is precluded by the Eleventh Amendment. Plaintiff filed an opposition to the motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 36); defendants filed a reply (Dkt. No. 38).
In tandem with filing their motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 31), defendants filed an answer on behalf of defendant Hsieh (Dkt. No. 32), conceding that "Dr. Hsieh filed an answer to Stephen's complaint because it states an Eighth Amendment claim at this stage" (Dkt. No. 43 at 2 n.1).
For the following reasons, the court recommends that defendants' motion to dismiss Dr. Traquina from this action be denied, but that defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiff's claim for monetary damages against both defendants in their official capacities be granted.
A. Legal Standards
Rule 12(b)(6), of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedures, authorizes motions to dismiss for "failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted." Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). In considering a motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), the court must accept as true the allegations of the complaint in question, Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89 (2007), and construe the pleading in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. Jenkins v. McKeithen, 395 U.S. 411, 421 (1969); Meek v. County of Riverside, 183 F. 3d 962, 965 (9th Cir. 1999). To survive dismissal for failure to state a claim, a claim must contain more than "naked assertions," "labels and conclusions" or "a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action." Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555-57 (2007). That is, "[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements do not suffice." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009). Furthermore, a claim upon which the court can grant relief must have facial plausibility. Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570. "A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged." Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. at 1949. Attachments to a complaint are considered to be part of the complaint for purposes of a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. Hal Roach Studios v. Richard Feiner & Co., 896 F. 2d 1542, 1555 n.19 (9th Cir. 1990).
A motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim should not be granted unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claims which would entitle him to relief. Hishon v. King & Spalding, 467 U.S. 69, 73 (1984). In general, pro se pleadings are held to a less stringent standard than those drafted by lawyers. Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972). The court has an obligation to construe such pleadings liberally. Bretz v. Kelman, 773 F. 2d 1026, 1027 n.1 (9th Cir. 1985) (en banc). However, the court's liberal interpretation of a pro se complaint may not supply the essential elements of a claim that were not pled. Ivey v. Bd. of Regents of Univ. of Alaska, 673 F. 2d 266, 268 (9th Cir. 1982).
B. Dr. Traquina
Defendants contend that Dr. Traquina should be dismissed from this action, on the ground that plaintiff's only claim against Dr. Traquina is premised on his alleged "supervisory liability." At all relevant times, Dr. Traquina was the Chief Medical Officer ("CMO") at CSP-SOL.
"Supervisory liability is imposed against a supervisory official in his individual capacity for his own culpable action or inaction in the training, supervision, or control of his subordinates, for his acquiescence in the constitutional deprivations of which the complaint is made, or for conduct that showed a reckless or callous indifference to the rights of others." Corales v. Bennett, 567 F.3d 554, 570 (9th Cir. 2009) (citations and internal quotations omitted). "Under Section 1983, supervisory officials are not liable for actions of subordinates on any theory of vicarious liability. A supervisor may be liable if there exists either (1) his or her personal involvement in the constitutional deprivation, or (2) a sufficient causal connection between the supervisor's wrongful conduct and the constitutional violation." Hansen v. Black, 885 F.2d 642, 645-46 (9th Cir. 1989) (citations omitted). Thus, "[a]lthough there is no pure respondeat superior liability under § 1983, a supervisor is liable for the acts of his subordinates 'if the supervisor participated in or directed the violations, or knew of the violations [of subordinates] and failed to act to prevent them.'" Preschooler II v. Clark County School Bd. of Trustees, 479 F.3d 1175, 1182 (9th Cir. 2007), quoting Taylor v. List, 880 F.2d 1040, 1045 (9th Cir. 1989). Additionally, "[s]upervisory liability exists even without overt personal participation in the offensive act if supervisory officials implement a policy so deficient that the policy 'itself is a repudiation of constitutional rights' and is 'the moving force of the constitutional violation.'" Hansen, 885 F.2d at 646, quoting Thompkins v. Belt, 828 F.2d 298, 304 (5th Cir. 1987).
On a motion to dismiss, the plaintiff "does not need to show with great specificity how each defendant contributed to the violation of his constitutional rights. Rather, he must state the allegations generally so as to provide notice to the defendants and alert the court as to what conduct violated clearly established law. See Hydrick v. Hunter, 466 F.3d 676, 689-90 (9th Cir. 2006) (denying policy-making officials qualified immunity at the motion to dismiss stage based on inferences that the officials played an instrumental role in the alleged abuses)." Preschooler II, at 1182.
The Second Amended Complaint only generally references defendant Traquina, e.g., pursuant to allegations that plaintiff's colonoscopy and first surgery were delayed "based on 'overcrowding' and 'monies' or 'budgetary' . . . under 'policy' 'custom' 'practice' of 'Kelso' and 'Traquina'." (Dkt. No. 22 at 6; see also id. ("under policy practice 'Kelso' 'Traquina' 'Swarthout'"); id. at 7 ("under policy of 'Swarthout' 'Traquina' and 'Kelso' based on 'willful overcrowding'"). Similarly, in his opposition to defendants' motion to dismiss, plaintiff asserts that Dr. Traquina demonstrated "personal involvement" in the conduct challenged by this action, by "'failing to implement' and 'maintain' 'a' 'system of tracking inmate, plaintiff, 'patients' by 'birthdate' and 'scheduling' the 'recommended services' as 'required' under 'CDCR' 'procedures' . . . ." (Dkt. No. 36 at 1-2.)
However, also in his opposition, plaintiff asserts that Dr. Traquina was personally involved in the 45-day delay of plaintiff's July 2010 surgery, despite clear knowledge that the surgery was deemed "urgent." (Dkt. No. 36 at 1- 3.) Plaintiff filed a copy of the Director's Level Review of his pertinent administrative grievance, issued August 19, 2010, which provides in pertinent part that, "Dr. Hsieh submitted an urgent referral for a colectomy procedure, which was approved by the Chief Physician and Surgeon [Dr. Traquina], and was pending scheduled with an outside facility." (Dkt. No. 36 at 6-7.) (See also id. at 13 (Second Level Review of same administrative grievance, issued June 21, 2010, which states in pertinent part that "Dr. Hsieh submitted an urgent referral fo a colectomy procedure, which has been approved by the Chief Physician and Surgeon [Dr. Traquina], and is pending scheduling with an outside facility."))
As defendants correctly contend, plaintiff's general allegations against Dr. Traquina, based on the alleged systemic failings of CSP-SOL's medical referral procedures and policies, are improperly premised on Dr. Traquina's alleged "supervisory liability," and are therefore non-cognizable for the reasons stated above. However, plaintiff's allegations, supported by the record, that Dr. Traquina was directly involved in approving plaintiff's surgical referral, support an inference that Dr. Traquina had a personal role in the timing of plaintiff's surgery. These allegations (as stated in the complaint, explained in plaintiff's opposition, and supported by the underlying administrative grievance), establish the requisite personal link to plaintiff's claim of deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs, viz., that Dr. Traquina, despite awareness that the referral was designated "urgent," may have contributed to the allegedly protracted 45-day delay in plaintiff obtaining his July 2010 surgery. The court cannot, on the present record, determine whether this delay constituted deliberately indifference. See Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 842 ("it is enough that the official acted or failed to act despite his knowledge of a substantial risk of serious harm"). While "mere delay of surgery, without more, is insufficient to state a claim of deliberate medical indifference," Shapley v. Nevada Bd. of State Prison Com'rs, 766 F.2d 404, 407 (9th Cir. 1985), "the more serious the medical needs of the prisoner, and the more unwarranted the defendant's actions in light of those needs, the more likely it is that a plaintiff has established 'deliberate indifference' on the part of the defendant," McGuckin, 974 F.2d 1050, 1061 (9th Cir. 1992), overruled on other grounds, WMX Technologies v. Miller, 104 F.3d 1133 (9th Cir. 1997) (en banc).
Therefore, the court recommends that defendants' motion to dismiss Dr. Traquina from this action be denied. For this reason, and other reasons set forth below, defendants will be required to file an amended answer that includes both defendants Traquina and Hsieh (as well as newly-named defendant Wenneker).
C. Eleventh Amendment Immunity
Defendants next move to dismiss plaintiff's damages claims against defendants in their official capacities. Plaintiff does not directly address this matter, but responds generally that he sues defendants in their both their personal and official capacities. (Dkt. No. 36 at 4.)
"The Eleventh Amendment bars actions for damages against state officials who are sued in their official capacities in federal court. That is so because a judgment against a public servant 'in his official capacity' imposes liability on the entity that he represents. However, a federal court, consistent with the Eleventh Amendment, may enjoin state officials to conform their future conduct to the requirements of federal law." Dittman v. California, 191 F.3d 1020, 1026 (9th Cir. 1999), citing Kentucky v. Graham, 473 U.S. 159, 169 (1985), and Quern v. Jordan, 440 U.S. 332, 337 (1979) (internal punctuation and quotations marks omitted); accord, Regents of the University of California v. Doe, 519 U.S. 425, 429 (1997).
These principles permit plaintiff to seek damages from defendants only in their personal capacities. Therefore, this court recommends granting defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiff's damages claim against defendants Hsieh and Traquina in their official capacities.
III. Plaintiff's Motion to Strike Defendant Hsieh's Affirmative Defenses Plaintiff moves to strike the affirmative defenses set forth in defendant Hsieh's answer. (Dkt. Nos. 37, 46.) Defendants filed an opposition. (Dkt. No. 43.) Plaintiff seeks an order of this court striking all fourteen of defendant Hsieh's affirmative defenses (see Answer, Dkt. No. 32 at 5-7), on the grounds that the answer was prematurely filed, and "the affirmative defenses [therein]. . . are not defenses that would act as a complete defense to plaintiff's complaint for damages." (Dkt. No. 37 at 1.)
Rule 12(f), of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, authorizes a court, pursuant to motion or sua sponte, to "strike from a pleading an insufficient defense or any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter." Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f). "To strike an affirmative defense, the moving party must convince the court that there are no questions of fact, that any questions of law are clear and not in dispute, and that under no set of circumstances could the defense succeed. The grounds for the motion must appear on the face of the pleading under attack or from matter which the court may judicially notice." SEC v. Sands, 902 F. Supp. 1149, 1165 (C.D. Cal.1995) (citations and internal quotation marks omitted). "[A] motion to strike which alleges the legal insufficiency of an affirmative defense will not be granted unless it appears to a certainty that plaintiffs would succeed despite any state of the facts which could be proved in support of the defense." Barnes v. AT & T Pension Ben. Plan-Nonbargained Program, 718 F. Supp. 2d 1167, 1170 (N.D. Cal. 2010) (citations and internal quotation marks omitted). "Motions to strike are generally regarded with disfavor because of the limited importance of pleading in federal practice, and because they are often used as a delaying tactic." Cal. Dep't of Toxic Substances Control v. Alco Pac., Inc., 217 F. Supp. 2d 1028, 1033 (C.D. Cal. 2002)).
B. Discussion
The court initially notes the inaccuracy of plaintiff's statement that defendant
Hsieh's answer was prematurely filed before defendants were served with the summons and complaint. Although this inference was reasonable, based on the filings in this case at the time the answer was filed on July 5, 2011 (Dkt. No. 32), defendants thereafter filed waivers of service that they had previously signed on June 22, 2011 (see Dkt. No. 35).
Moreover, the court finds no basis for concluding that any of Dr. Hsieh's affirmative defenses are improperly pled or legally insufficient. The fact that some may not provide a "complete defense" is immaterial; none appear to be "redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous," Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f).
Therefore, plaintiff's motion to strike the affirmative defenses in defendant Hsieh's Answer is denied. Nevertheless, for reasons stated elsewhere in this order and findings and recommendations, defendants will be required to file an amended answer.
IV. Plaintiff's Motion to Strike Discovery Propounded by Defendant Hsieh Plaintiff moves to strike discovery requests served on him by defendant Hsieh, on
the ground that they were prematurely propounded, as evidenced by the matters pending herein, and because no discovery or scheduling order has been issued in this case. (Dkt. No. 39.) Defendants respond that Dr. Hsieh should be permitted to propound discovery during the pendency of these matters because he filed an answer. (Dkt. No. 44.) Defendant Hsieh also argues that the requested discovery is not impacted by resolution of the pending motions, that plaintiff will be required to respond to discovery requests in any case, and that plaintiff is not prejudiced by being required to do so now. (Id.)
While parties to a prisoner action are exempt from the initial disclosure requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26, they are free to agree to conduct discovery prior to the issuance of a discovery order. However, it is the usual practice of this court to refrain from compelling compliance with discovery requests before all defendants have answered, and the court has issued an initial scheduling order that establishes the parameters and deadlines for discovery. See e.g. Scanlan v. Sisto, 2012 WL 78381, *6 (E.D. Cal. 2012) (denying as premature plaintiff's motion for a subpoena, explaining that "[d]iscovery will commence when the court issues an order setting the schedule and terms of discovery, as the court ordinarily does after the remaining defendants file their answers"); Suknaich v. Yates, 2011 WL 5102710, *1 (E.D. Cal. 2011) (denying as premature plaintiff's motion for discovery, pursuant to the court's policy, set forth in its "First Informational Order" issued in each prisoner case, that "[n]o discovery may be conducted without court permission until an answer is filed and the court issues the discovery order" (internal quotation marks omitted)).
A "Discovery and Scheduling Order" has not been issued in the present case, due to the pendency of defendant Traquina's motion to dismiss, notwithstanding the filing of an answer by defendant Hsieh. Therefore, plaintiff is not required to respond to defendant Hsieh's currently pending discovery requests. Accordingly, plaintiff's motion to strike defendant Hsieh's discovery requests as premature is granted. However, following the issuance of the scheduling order the defendants are free to propound the discovery requests to plaintiff.
V. Plaintiff's Request to File Supplemental Complaint
Plaintiff has filed a proposed "Amended Supplemental Complaint" (Dkt. No. 42),*fn4
and a request (Dkt. No. 41) that it be read in tandem with plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint. The proposed Amended Supplemental Complaint ("supplemental complaint") contains factual allegations of allegedly relevant matters that occurred after plaintiff filed his Second Amended Complaint, and seeks to add Dr. Wenneker as a defendant. Although defendants have had sufficient time to respond to this matter, they have not done so.
A. Legal Standards "Rule 15(d) [Federal Rules of Civil Procedure] provides that a court may permit a
party to serve a supplemental pleading setting forth transactions, occurrences, or events that have happened since the filing of the pleading to be supplemented, thereby bringing the case up to date. Leave must be sought by motion, upon reasonable notice to the other parties, and the court may impose such terms as are just. The purpose of subdivision (d) is to promote as complete an adjudication of the dispute between the parties as is possible." Wright, Miller, Kane & Marcus, 6A Fed. Prac. & Proc. Civ. § 1504 (2d ed. 2010). "While leave to permit supplemental pleadings is favored, it cannot be used to introduce a separate, distinct and new cause of action. See Planned Parenthood of So. Arizona v. Neely, 130 F.3d 400, 402 (9th Cir.1997). Matters newly alleged in a supplemental complaint must have some relation to the claims set forth in the original pleading. See Keith v. Volpe, 858 F.2d 467, 474 (9th Cir.1988)." Estrada v. Rowe, 2010 WL 957120, *1 (N.D. Cal. 2010).
Plaintiff's proposed supplemental complaint comes within the purpose of Rule 15(d), because it is limited to relevant new factual allegations that occurred after plaintiff filed his Second Amended Complaint. The proposed supplemental complaint alleges that plaintiff underwent a second colonoscopy on July 25, 2011, performed by Dr. Sogge, who discovered markings he had made June 7, 2010 (pursuant to conducting plaintiff's first colonoscopy), on the polyp that was purportedly removed by Dr. Wenneker on July 21, 2010. As plaintiff states, "what did Dr. Wenneker remove on 7-21-10[?]" (Dkt. No. 42 at 3.) Plaintiff alleges that his "pain and suffering [were] exacerbated unnecessarily by Wenneker by failure to perform serious surgery to remove 40 cm polyp o[n] 7-21-10." (Id. at 4 (internal citations omitted).)
These new allegations warrant granting plaintiff's request to file his proposed supplemental complaint, which states a potentially cognizable Eighth Amendment claim of deliberate indifference against Dr. Wenneker.
However, a subsequently-filed motion in this action, filed October 14, 2011 (Dkt. No. 47, addressed separately below), demonstrates the existence of yet further relevant facts that should be incorporated in a comprehensive pleading. While proferred for other reasons, plaintiff states in pertinent part:
This lawsuit is pending . . . as well as the botched surgery of 7-21-10 whereas doctor willfully and negligently removed plaintiff['s] entire lower intestines and missed the polyp whereas was discovered on 2nd colon[osc]opy of 7-25-11 over a year later as doctor whom botched first surgery willfully allowed to do 2nd surgery against plaintiff['s] will . . . whereas had to cut plaintiff['s] upper chest area to allow top intestines to be freed to stretch to lower area to connect after removal of infected poly on 8-17-11. . . . (Dkt. No. 47 at 6 (internal quotation marks omitted); see also Dkt. Nos. 45, 49.) Apparently, Dr. Wenneker performed the second surgery on plaintiff, on August 17, 2011. These relevant factual allegations should also be included in the operative complaint.
For these reasons, subject to the district judge's review of this court's findings and recommendations regarding defendants' motion to dismiss, the undersigned recommends that the court, forthwith: (1) grant plaintiff's request for leave to file his proposed amended supplemental complaint, and to add Dr. Wenneker as a defendant in this action; and (2) grant plaintiff leave to file a comprehensive Third Amended Complaint, against defendants Drs. Hsieh, Traquina and Wenneker, that includes the allegations of plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint and Amended Supplemental Complaint, as well the relevant allegations of plaintiff's other filings.
VI. Plaintiff's Motion for Issuance of an Order to Show Cause
In a motion signed by plaintiff on August 15, 2011, two days before his second surgery, but filed in this court on August 26, 2011, plaintiff requested an "emergency order to show cause within 5 days reasons plaintiff have not had emergency surgery after botched surgery of 7-21-10 when urgent emergency 13 months ago" (sic) (Dkt. No. 45 at 1 (internal quotation marks omitted)), subtitled "Reasons same Doctor Wenneker is scheduled to do 2nd surgery . . .," and "Reasons Dr. Hsieh is handling treatment in this matter. . . ." (id.). Pursuant to this motion, plaintiff sought both an "emergency order to show cause reasons emergency surgery has not been performed. . . ," an order requiring "emergency surgery by [a] doctor not aff[ia]liated with this lawsuit. . .," and an order requiring that the procedure be conducted at an "appropriate hospital [where] prejudice is not practiced against plaintiff [based] on prior visit and blacks as a race. . . ." (Id. at 2 (internal quotation marks omitted).)
Each of these matters was moot by the time plaintiff's motion reached this court. Accordingly, plaintiff's request for an order to show cause (Dkt. No. 45), is denied as moot.
VII. Plaintiff's Motions Concerning his Transfer to San Quentin
On November 21, 2011, plaintiff filed a notice of change of address, indicating that he is now incarcerated at San Quentin State Prison. (Dkt. No. 50.) Plaintiff sought to prevent this transfer, pursuant to a request for a stay and temporary restraining order, filed October 14, 2011. (Dkt. No. 47.) Defendants filed an opposition (Dkt. No. 48); plaintiff filed a reply (Dkt. No. 49). Although that motion is now moot (and without merit, as discussed below), plaintiff thereafter filed another motion for preliminary injunctive relief (Dkt. No. 51), wherein he challenges his current conditions of confinement at San Quentin.
As this court previously noted in this action, a preliminary injunction should not issue unless necessary to prevent threatened injury that would impair the court's ability to grant effective relief in the action. Fed. R. Civ. P. 65; Sierra On-Line, Inc. v. Phoenix Software, Inc., 739 F.2d 1415, 1422 (9th Cir. 1984); Gon v. First State Ins. Co., 871 F.2d 863 (9th Cir. 1989). The principal purpose of preliminary injunctive relief is to preserve the court's power to render a meaningful decision pursuant to a trial on the merits. See 11A Charles Alan Wright & Arthur R. Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure, § 2947 (2d ed. 2010). "The proper legal standard for preliminary injunctive relief requires a party to demonstrate 'that he is likely to succeed on the merits, that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief, that the balance of equities tips in his favor, and that an injunction is in the public interest.'" Stormans, Inc. v. Selecky, 586 F.3d 1109, 1127 (9th Cir. 2009), quoting Winter v. Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc., 129 S. Ct. 365, 375-76 (2008). In cases brought by prisoners involving conditions of confinement, any preliminary injunction "must be narrowly drawn, extend no further than necessary to correct the harm the court finds requires preliminary relief, and be the least intrusive means necessary to correct the harm." 18 U.S.C. § 3626(a)(2).
In his initial motion (Dkt. No. 47), plaintiff alleges that his transfer was retaliatory, consistent with a pattern of retaliatory acts since 2005 or 2006, but he does not elaborate, other than stating that the classification committee routinely transfers inmates who have no jobs, yet intentionally refuses to offer jobs to inmates. (Dkt. No. 47 at 3, 5.) Plaintiff also alleges that San Quentin is not an appropriate placement for him, because it is a higher security facility than CSPSOL, where plaintiff was accustomed to "dorm living," fewer restrictions, and more privileges. (Id. at 5.) Plaintiff also states that San Quentin is "further north" than CSP-SOL, which creates additional hardships because plaintiff is from Los Angeles. (Id.) Plaintiff's only medically-related contentions are that the cells at San Quentin have "inadequate ventilation," which will "aggravate" his "puncture lung" (id.), and that the move demonstrates "disregard for plaintiff['s] life when under doctors['] care," (id. (internal quotation marks omitted)).
Only plaintiff's medically-related contentions are remotely related to the instant action. None of the other reasons for seeking retention at CSP-SOL are addressed in this action, and hence provide no basis for granting injunctive relief. Even plaintiff's medically-related reasons are too tangential to warrant maintaining plaintiff's incarceration at CSP-SOL. Plaintiff's asserted lung problems are not addressed by this litigation. Plaintiff's newly-stated desire to maintain the continuity of his health care at CSP-SOL runs counter to his claims in this action. Plaintiff fails to demonstrate that his continued incarceration at CSP-SOL was necessary for the court to preserve the status quo before reaching the merits of this action.
More significantly, convicted prisoners have no reasonable expectation that they will remain in any particular facility, and prison officials have broad authority to transfer prisoners from one facility to another. Meachum v. Fano, 427 U.S. 215 (1976); Montanye v. Haymes, 427 U.S. 236 (1976). "[A] prisoner's liberty interests are sufficiently extinguished by his conviction that the state may generally confine or transfer him to any of its institutions, indeed, even to a prison in another state, without offending the Constitution." Bravo v. Hewchuck, 2006 WL 3618023, *1 (N.D. Cal. 2006) (citations omitted); Olim v. Wakinekona, 461 U.S. 238, 245-246 (1983). Therefore, plaintiff's motion to prevent his transfer to San Quentin, while now moot, is also without merit.
Plaintiff's more recent motion for preliminary injunctive relief (Dkt. No. 51), challenges conditions of confinement at San Quentin. Plaintiff's allegations include the alleged failure of prison staff to abide by plaintiff's "low-bunk chrono;" computers that are "not updated;" failure of medical staff to properly treat plaintiff when he "blacked-out" on December 6, 2011, while working in the law library; improper classification of plaintiff to "close custody" status; failure to give plaintiff his television; alleged lack of cleanliness, lack of electricity and lighting. (Id.) None of these allegations address the merits of the instant action. Therefore, plaintiff's pending motion for a temporary restraining order should be denied.
For the foregoing reasons, it is recommended that both of petitioner's pending motions for preliminary injunctive relief be denied.
VIII. Admonishment to Plaintiff
Plaintiff is cautioned that a litigant proceeding in forma pauperis, particularly one who is already a "three strikes" litigant pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), may suffer restricted access to the court where it is determined that he has filed excessive motions in a pending action. DeLong v. Hennessey, 912 F.2d 1144 (9th Cir. 1990); see also Tripati v. Beaman, 878 F2d 351, 352 (10th Cir. 1989). Plaintiff is directed to refrain from filing in this action any further motion for injunctive relief, absent an extraordinary and compelling reason that is clearly related to the merits of this case. Should plaintiff fail to abide by this admonition, the court will consider whether it is necessary to restrict plaintiff's access to the court.
IX. Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiff's motion (Dkt. No. 37) to strike the affirmative defenses set forth in defendant Hsieh's answer to the Second Amended Complaint, is denied.
2. Plaintiff's motion (Dkt. No. 39) to strike defendant Hsieh's discovery requests is granted, without prejudice to the requests being later propounded.
3. Plaintiff's motion for issuance of an order to show cause (Dkt. No. 45), is denied.
In addition, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that:
1. Defendants' motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 31), should be granted in part and denied in part; the court should dismiss plaintiff's damages claims against defendants in their official capacities, but deny defendants' motion to dismiss defendant Traquina from this action.
2. Plaintiff's motions for preliminary injunctive relief (Dkt. Nos. 47, 51), should be denied.
3. Plaintiff's request (Dkt. No. 41) for leave to file his proposed Amended Supplemental Complaint (Dkt. No. 42), should be granted, and Dr. Wenneker should be added as a defendant in this action.*fn5
4. Plaintiff should be granted leave to file, within twenty-eight (28) days after the filing date of the district judge's order, a comprehensive Third Amended Complaint against defendants Hsieh, Traquina and Wenneker; failure to timely file a Third Amended Complaint will result in this action continuing to proceed on plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint (Dkt. No 22), and Amended Supplemental Complaint (Dkt. No. 42).
These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within 21 days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Any response to the objections shall be filed and served within 14 days after service of the objections. The parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).
Our website includes the main text of the court's opinion but does not include the
docket number, case citation or footnotes. Upon purchase, docket numbers and/or
citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a legal proceeding.
Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision.
Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.
Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.
LRC, Inc. About Us


text:
This guy did a great job at taking amazing pictures. We are very pleased and we would recommended him and call him again.
Sara, the wedding photographer at my sister's wedding did a perfect job. She took beautiful photos and was so easy to deal with in every aspect. You can visit Sara's website to see her work.
Get your job done right
We verify our businesses
Only hire the best
Free to request and free to hire!
Airds, NSW
15 may 2016
3 - 4 hours
More than $2,000
My daughter will be having her christening on may 15 2016 at St. Raphael, Nicholas and Irene Orthodox Church in Liverpool at 12pm and reception followed immediately after ceremony next door at Font...Make a similar request