Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Rexroad v. Nevin

United States District Court, D. Nevada

April 16, 2019

JOSHUA REXROAD, Plaintiff,
v.
D. NEVIN, et al., Defendants.

          ORDER

          JAMES C. MAHAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         Presently before the court is defendants Jennifer Nash and Joseph Faliszek's (collectively “defendants”) motion to dismiss. (ECF No. 23). Plaintiff Joshua Rexroad filed a response (ECF No. 29), to which defendants replied (ECF No. 32).

         Also before the court is plaintiffs motion to extend. (ECF No. 26). Defendants did not file a response and the time to do so has passed.

         I. Facts

         This is a prisoner civil rights case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1983. See (ECF Nos. 8, 9). Plaintiff, who is a prisoner in the custody of the Ely State Prison (“Ely”), proceeds pro se and in forma pauperis. Id.

         Plaintiff alleges that on June 8, 2015, several members of the correctional emergency response team placed plaintiff in administrative segregation without access to his prayer rug and a copy of the Quran. (ECF No. 9). When plaintiff inquired into the reason for the administrative segregation, prison officials informed plaintiff that there was a pending investigation and that they did not know what the investigation was about. Id. However, plaintiff did receive a notice showing that he would have an administrative hearing. (ECF No. 29).

         Seven months and twelve days later, on January 20, 2016, Ely released plaintiff from administrative segregation. (ECF No. 9). Plaintiff alleges that he never received an administrative hearing. Id.

         On May 22, 2018, plaintiff initiated this action. (ECF No. 9). The court screened the complaint and allowed plaintiff to proceed on counts I, IV, and V. (ECF No. 10). In count IV, plaintiff alleges that defendants violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by placing plaintiff in administrative segregation and denying him a hearing or periodic review. (ECF No. 9).

         Now, defendants move to dismiss count IV. (ECF No. 23).

         II. Legal Standard

         A court may dismiss a complaint for “failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). A properly pled complaint must provide “[a] short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2); Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007). While Rule 8 does not require detailed factual allegations, it demands “more than labels and conclusions” or a “formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (citation omitted).

         “Factual allegations must be enough to rise above the speculative level.” Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555. Thus, to survive a motion to dismiss, a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter to “state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (citation omitted).

         In Iqbal, the Supreme Court clarified the two-step approach district courts are to apply when considering motions to dismiss. First, the court must accept as true all well-pled factual allegations in the complaint; however, legal conclusions are not entitled to the assumption of truth. Id. at 678-79. Mere recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported only by conclusory statements, do not suffice. Id. at 678.

         Second, the court must consider whether the factual allegations in the complaint allege a plausible claim for relief. Id. at 679. A claim is facially plausible when the plaintiffs complaint alleges facts that allow the court to draw a reasonable ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.