1:10-cv-00491
E.D. Cal.Aug 2, 2011Background
- Plaintiff Ram Nehara, a former NKSP nurse, sues the State of California, CDCR, NKSP, and thirteen individuals for damages.
- Plaintiff alleges retaliation on December 22, 2006 by exposing him to a violent inmate after he complained of discriminatory overtime and shifts, resulting in serious injuries.
- Plaintiff alleges he was forced to manipulate an incident report and subjected to internal investigations and disciplinary proceedings, culminating in his April 30, 2009 termination.
- On November 5, 2010 the court dismissed the FAC as to NKSP; the SAC was filed on November 18, 2010.
- Defendants move to dismiss state tort claims against NKSP on sovereign immunity grounds and unexhausted tort claims against individual defendants.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is NKSP a state agency for sovereign immunity purposes? | Nek argues NKSP status is unsettled in SAC. | NKSP is an agency of the State through CDCR. | NKSP is a state prison operated by the CDCR; sovereign immunity bars tort claims against NKSP. |
| Have plaintiff's state tort claims against individual defendants been exhausted? | NKSP not public entity; exhaustion excused; no Board claim filed. | Exhaustion required; failure grounds dismissal. | Unexhausted tort claims against individuals are dismissed with prejudice. |
| Are the state tort claims against NKSP and individuals properly dismissed under Rule 12(b)(6)? | Plaintiff states colorable claims against state entities. | Claims fail due to sovereign immunity and failure to exhaust. | Claims dismissed with prejudice; amendments permitted to address pleading defects. |
Key Cases Cited
- Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dept., 901 F.2d 696 (9th Cir. 1990) (standard for dismissal under 12(b)(6))
- Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (S. Ct. 2007) (plausibility pleading standard)
- Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937 (S. Ct. 2009) (plausibility pleading standard; rejects conclusory allegations)
- Moss v. U.S. Secret Serv., 572 F.3d 962 (9th Cir. 2009) (nonconclusory factual content must plausibly suggest a claim)
- Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199 (S. Ct. 2007) (exhaustion requirements under habeas/procedural rules)
- United States v. Ritchie, 342 F.3d 903 (9th Cir. 2003) (when considering Rule 12(b)(6) dismissals, may rely on certain extrinsic materials)
- McCarthy v. United States, 850 F.2d 558 (9th Cir. 1988) (court may review jurisdictional facts on Rule 12(b)(1))
- Robinson v. United States, 586 F.3d 683 (9th Cir. 2009) (reaffirming authority to resolve jurisdictional disputes on 12(b)(1))
- Rattlesnake Coal. v. E.P.A., 509 F.3d 1095 (9th Cir. 2007) (burden on party asserting jurisdiction)
- Sprewell v. Golden State Warriors, 266 F.3d 979 (9th Cir. 2001) (standards for rejecting unwarranted inferences in pleadings)