(PC) Jawad v. Soto ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 RYAN J. JAWAD, Case No. 1:22-cv-00238-AWI-EPG (PC) 10 Plaintiff, ORDER REQUIRING PARTIES TO EXCHANGE DOCUMENTS 11 v. 12 M. SOTO, 13 Defendant(s). 14 15 Ryan Jawad (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in 16 this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 17 On November 9, 2022, the Court issued an order requiring the parties to file scheduling 18 and discovery statements. (ECF No. 26). The parties have now filed their statements. (ECF 19 Nos. 28 & 33). 20 The Court has reviewed this case and the parties’ statements.1 In an effort to secure the 21 just, speedy, and inexpensive disposition of this action,2 the Court will direct that certain 22 23 1 In his statement, Defendant “proposes that any order regarding initial disclosures that may issue should specifically exempt any sensitive, confidential documents.” (ECF No. 28, p. 6). The Court will not adopt this 24 proposal. As discussed in this order, the Court is requiring that certain relevant documents be promptly produced. If Defendant objects to the production of any of these documents, Defendant should follow the procedures 25 discussed in this order. 2 See, e.g., United States v. W.R. Grace, 526 F.3d 499, 508-09 (9th Cir. 2008) (“We begin with the 26 principle that the district court is charged with effectuating the speedy and orderly administration of justice. There is universal acceptance in the federal courts that, in carrying out this mandate, a district court has the authority to 27 enter pretrial case management and discovery orders designed to ensure that the relevant issues to be tried are identified, that the parties have an opportunity to engage in appropriate discovery and that the parties are 28 adequately and timely prepared so that the trial can proceed efficiently and intelligibly.”). 1 documents that are central to the dispute be promptly produced.3 2 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that: 3 1. Each party has sixty days from the date of service of this order to serve opposing 4 parties, or their counsel, if represented, with copies of the following documents 5 and/or evidence that they have in their possession, custody, or control, to the 6 extent the parties have not already done so:4 7 a. Documents regarding exhaustion of Plaintiff’s claim, including 602s, 8 Form 22s, and responses from the appeals office. This includes 9 grievances with log numbers 102254, 110398, and 117424, and related 10 documents. 11 b. All documents regarding the Rules Violation Report associated with the 12 incident(s) alleged in the complaint, including disciplinary charges and 13 findings. This includes Plaintiff’s March 25, 2021 Rules Violation 14 Report with log number 7073407, and any related documents. 15 c. Medical Reports of Injury or Unusual Occurrence (CDCR 7219s) dated 16 March 25 and 26, 2022, related to the event(s) at issue in the complaint. 17 d. Witness statements and evidence that were generated from 18 investigation(s) related to the event(s) at issue in the complaint, such as 19 an investigation stemming from the processing of Plaintiff’s 20 grievance(s).5 21 3 Advisory Committee Notes to 1993 Amendment to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure regarding Rule 22 26(a) (“The enumeration in Rule 26(a) of items to be disclosed does not prevent a court from requiring by order or local rule that the parties disclose additional information without a discovery request.”). 23 4 Defense counsel is requested to obtain these documents from Plaintiff’s institution(s) of confinement. If defense counsel is unable to do so, defense counsel should inform Plaintiff that a third party subpoena is required. 24 5 See Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81, 94-95 (2006) (“[P]roper exhaustion improves the quality of those prisoner suits that are eventually filed because proper exhaustion often results in the creation of an administrative 25 record that is helpful to the court. When a grievance is filed shortly after the event giving rise to the grievance, witnesses can be identified and questioned while memories are still fresh, and evidence can be gathered and 26 preserved.”). The Court notes that Defendant(s) only need to produce documents such as a Confidential Appeal Inquiry 27 or a Use of Force Critique to the extent those documents contain witness statements related to the incident(s) alleged in the complaint and/or evidence related to the incident(s) alleged in the complaint that will not be 28 provided to Plaintiff separately. 1 e. The use of force video interview of Plaintiff that was recorded on March 2 26, 2021.° 3 2. If any party obtains documents and/or other evidence described above later in 4 the case from a third party, that party shall provide all other parties with copies 5 of the documents and/or evidence within thirty days. 6 3. Parties do not need to produce documents or evidence that they have already 7 produced. 8 4. Parties do not need to produce documents or evidence that were provided to 9 them by the opposing party. 10 5. Parties may object to producing any of the above-listed documents and/or 11 evidence. Objections shall be filed with the Court and served on all other parties 12 within sixty days from the date of service of this order (or within thirty days of 13 receiving additional documents and/or evidence). The objection should include 14 the basis for not providing the documents and/or evidence. If Defendant(s) 15 object based on the official information privilege, Defendant(s) shall follow the 16 procedures described in the Court’s scheduling order. Ifa party files an 17 objection, all other parties have fourteen days from the date the objection is filed 18 to file a response. If any party files a response to an objection, the Court will 19 issue a ruling on the objection. 20 IT IS SO ORDERED. 22 ll Dated: _ February 24, 2023 [Jee ey —— 23 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 24 25 26 2H og ||. ° If Plaintiff is not allowed possess, or is unable to play, video recordings, defense counsel shall work with staff at Plaintiff’s institution of confinement to ensure that Plaintiff is able to view the video recording.