Fox

(PC) Birrell v. Fox

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJune 21, 20232:16-cv-01818California315 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 DAVID WESLEY BIRRELL, et al., No. 2:16-cv-1818 DJC CKD P Plaintiffs, v. ORDER ROBERT W. FOX, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff Alford, the only remaining plaintiff in this action, is proceeding on a claim for injunctive relief under the Eighth Amendment for exposure to harmful substances, including asbestos, against defendant Fox in his official capacity as the Warden of the California Medical Facility. Defendant Fox has answered. Discovery commenced some time ago but was never completed. A review of the court’s record reveals that defendant Alford no longer resides at the California Medical facility. This being the case, defendant will be granted 21 days within which to file a motion to dismiss Alford’s remaining claim as moot. See Andrews v. Cervantes, 493 F.3d 1047, 1053 n.5 (9th Cir. 2007) (prisoner's claims for injunctive relief generally become moot upon transfer) citing Johnson v. Moore, 948 F.2d 517, 519 (9th…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.