Alan Dohner v. Robert Depweg

MEMORANDUM

Alan R. Dohner, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging constitutional violations in connection with a criminal investigation. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo. S.E.C. v. Nite, 207 F.3d 1134, 1135 (9th Cir.2000) (per curiara). We vacate and remand.

Before summary judgment is granted in a pro se prisoner’s action, the pro se prisoner must be provided with fair notice of the requirements of the summary judgment rule. See Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952, 960-61 (9th Cir.1998) (en banc); see also Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(e). It is undisputed that Dohner, who was a prisoner proceeding pro se at the time that summary judgment was filed, was not provided with the notice required by Rand .

Contrary to appellees’ contention, the error was not harmless because Dohner had not received Rand notice in prior recent litigation, and the record does not disclose that he had a complete understanding of the requirements of Rule 56. See Rand, 154 F.3d at 961-62 (explaining that “harmless error review is inappropriate in most cases” and refusing to engage in “subjective scrutiny of…