Shelmon v. Yasin et al

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
United States District Court
Northern District of California
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
MARLON SHELMON,
Plaintiff,
v.
C. YASIN, et al.,
Defendants.
Case No. 26-cv-08812-SVK
ORDER OF SERVICE
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff, a California prisoner, filed this pro se civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983 against F. Lee, O. Yasin, and M. Deverick, three officials at the California Training
Facility (“CTF”).1 Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis is granted in a separate
order. For the reasons explained below, the complaint is ordered served upon Defendants.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
Federal courts must engage in a preliminary screening of cases in which prisoners seek
redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915A(a). The Court must identify cognizable claims or dismiss the complaint, or any portion
of the complaint, if the complaint “is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which
relief may be granted,” or “seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such
relief.” Id. § 1915A(b). Pro se pleadings must be liberally construed. Balistreri v. Pacifica
Police Dep't, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1990).
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2) requires only “a short and plain statement of the
claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” “Specific facts are not necessary; the
1 Plaintiff consented to the jurisdiction of a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(c). (ECF No. 8.)
Case 5:26-cv-08812-SVK Document 10 Filed 10/14/26 Page 1 of 6

2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
United States District Court
Northern District of California
statement need only give the defendant fair notice of what the . . . . claim is and the grounds upon
which it rests.” Erickson v. Pardus, 127 S. Ct. 2197, 2200 (2007) (citations omitted). Although to
state a claim a complaint “does not need detailed factual allegations, . . . a plaintiff’s obligation to
provide the grounds of his entitle[ment] to relief requires more than labels and conclusions, and a
formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do. . . . Factual allegations must
be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level.” Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly,
127 S. Ct. 1955, 1964-65 (2007) (citations omitted). A complaint must proffer “enough facts to
state a claim for relief that is plausible on its face.” Id. at 1974.
To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two elements: (1) that a
right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and (2) that the alleged
violation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law. West v. Atkins, 487 U.S.
42, 48 (1988).
LEGAL CLAIMS
Plaintiff alleges CTF housing units had missing windowpanes between October 2025 and
January 2026. He alleges his cell had missing windowpanes during this time period, allowing sub-
freezing temperatures in his cell and causing him illness, shoulder pain, and discomfort. He
alleges Defendants knew about this problem but nevertheless failed to fix the windows and
prohibited inmates from using any curtains or other window coverings to guard against inclement
and cold weather. Eventually, in response to an administrative grievance about this issue, officials
fixed his window in January 2026. He seeks damages and injunctive relief based upon the time
period when there were missing windowpanes in his cell.
When liberally construed, Plaintiff’s allegations state plausible claims against Defendants
for the violation of his Eighth Amendment rights. See Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 832,
834, 837 (1994) (holding deliberate indifference by prison officials to a dangerous condition at the
prison that poses an excessive risk to inmate health or safety violates the Eighth Amendment).
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons,
1. Defendants F. Lee, O. Yasin, and M. Deverick shall be served at the California Training
Case 5:26-cv-08812-SVK Document 10 Filed 10/14/26 Page 2 of 6

3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
United States District Court
Northern District of California
Facility.
Service shall proceed under the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation’s
(CDCR) e-service program for civil rights cases from prisoners in CDCR custody. In accordance
with the program, the Clerk is directed to serve on CDCR via email the following documents: the
Complaint, a Magistrate Judge jurisdiction consent form, this Order, a CDCR Report of E-Service
Waiver form, and a summons. The Clerk also shall serve a copy of this Order on the Plaintiff.
No later than 40 days after service of this order via email on CDCR, CDCR shall provide
the Court a completed CDCR Report of E-Service Waiver advising the Court which Defendant(s)
listed in this order will be waiving service of process without the need for service by the United
States Marshal Service (USMS) and which Defendant(s) decline to waive service or could not be
reached. CDCR also shall provide a copy of the CDCR Report of E-Service Waiver to the
California Attorney General’s Office which, within 21 days, shall file with the Court a waiver of
service of process for the Defendant(s) who are waiving service.
Upon receipt of the CDCR Report of E-Service Waiver, the Clerk shall prepare for each
Defendant who has not waived service according to the CDCR Report of E-Service Waiver a
USM-205 Form. The Clerk shall provide to the USMS the completed USM-205 forms and copies
of this Order, the summons, and the operative complaint for service upon each Defendant who has
not waived service. The Clerk also shall provide to the USMS a copy of the CDCR Report of E-
Service Waiver.
2. Defendants shall complete and file the Magistrate Judge jurisdiction consent form
within the deadline provided on the form. Defendants shall also file an answer in accordance with
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
3. To expedite the resolution of this case1
a. If the parties wish to file a motion for summary judgment or other dispositive
motion, they shall do so no later than January 8, 2027. Any summary judgment motion shall be
supported by adequate factual documentation and shall conform in all respects to Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 56 and shall include as exhibits all records and incident reports stemming from the
events at issue. If Defendants are of the opinion that this case cannot be resolved by summary
Case 5:26-cv-08812-SVK Document 10 Filed 10/14/26 Page 3 of 6

4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
United States District Court
Northern District of California
judgment, they shall so inform the Court prior to the date the summary judgment motion is due.
b. Along with service of any motion for summary judgment, Defendants shall also
serve Plaintiff, on a separate paper, the appropriate notice required by Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d
952, 953-954 (9th Cir. 1998) (en banc). See Woods v. Carey, 684 F.3d 934, 940-941 (9th Cir.
2012). Plaintiff must also read the attached page headed “NOTICE -- WARNING,” which is
provided to him pursuant to Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952, 953-954 (9th Cir. 1998) (en banc).
c. Oppositions to any dispositive motions shall be filed and served upon the
opposing party no later than February 5, 2027.
d. The parties shall file a reply to any opposition no later than February 19, 2027.
e. The dispositive motion shall be deemed submitted as of the date the reply brief
is due. No hearing will be held on the motion unless the Court so orders at a later date.
4. All communications by Plaintiff with the Court must be served on Defendants or
their counsel once counsel has been designated, by mailing a true copy of the document to
Defendants or heir counsel. Defendants shall serve all papers filed with the Court promptly on
Plaintiff.
5. Discovery may be taken in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
No further Court order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(a)(2) is required before the
parties may conduct discovery.
Plaintiff is reminded that state prisoners inmates may review all non-confidential material
in their medical and central files, pursuant to In re Olson, 37 Cal. App. 3d 783 (Cal. Ct. App.
1974), 15 California Code of Regulations § 3370, and the CDCR’s Department Operations
Manual §§ 13030.4, 13030.16, 13030.16.1-13030.16.3, 13030.21, and 71010.11.1. Requests to
review these files or for copies of materials in them must be made directly to prison officials, not
to the Court.
////
////
////
////
Case 5:26-cv-08812-SVK Document 10 Filed 10/14/26 Page 4 of 6

5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
United States District Court
Northern District of California
6. It is Plaintiff's responsibility to prosecute this case. Plaintiff must keep the Court
informed of any change of address by filing a separate paper with the clerk headed “Notice of
Change of Address.” He also must comply with the Court's orders in a timely fashion. Failure to
do so may result in the dismissal of this action for failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 41(b). Reasonable requests for an extension of a deadline will be allowed upon a
showing of good cause if the request is filed prior to the deadline.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: October 14, 2026
Susan van Keulen
United States Magistrate Judge
Case 5:26-cv-08812-SVK Document 10 Filed 10/14/26 Page 5 of 6

6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
United States District Court
Northern District of California
NOTICE -- WARNING (SUMMARY JUDGMENT)
If Defendants move for summary judgment, they are seeking to have your case dismissed.
A motion for summary judgment under Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure will, if
granted, end your case.
Rule 56 tells you what you must do in order to oppose a motion for summary judgment.
Generally, summary judgment must be granted when there is no genuine issue of material fact--
that is, if there is no real dispute about any fact that would affect the result of your case, the party
who asked for summary judgment is entitled to judgment as a matter of law, which will end your
case. When a party you are suing makes a motion for summary judgment that is properly
supported by declarations (or other sworn testimony), you cannot simply rely on what your
complaint says. Instead, you must set out specific facts in declarations, depositions, answers to
interrogatories, or authenticated documents, as provided in Rule 56(e), that contradict the facts
shown in Defendant's declarations and documents and show that there is a genuine issue of
material fact for trial. If you do not submit your own evidence in opposition, summary judgment,
if appropriate, may be entered against you. If summary judgment is granted, your case will be
dismissed and there will be no trial.
Case 5:26-cv-08812-SVK Document 10 Filed 10/14/26 Page 6 of 6