(PC) Richard v. Joseph ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CRAIG RICHARD, No. 2: 21-cv-0975 KJN P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 JOSEPH, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding without counsel, with a civil rights action pursuant 18 to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. For the reasons stated herein, defendants are ordered to submit a 19 supplemental affidavit in support of their proposed redactions of the Prison Rape Elimination Act 20 (“PREA”) documents submitted on or around August 17, 2022. 21 On January 20, 2022, plaintiff moved to compel defendants to produce documents created 22 during a PREA investigation conducted as a result of plaintiff’s allegations against defendant 23 Joseph. (ECF No. 27.) On April 27, 2022, the undersigned ordered defendants to submit the 24 PREA investigation documents for in-camera review. (ECF No. 35.) 25 On May 18, 2022, defendants submitted the PREA investigation documents for in-camera 26 review. After conducting an in-camera review of the PREA investigation documents submitted 27 on May 18, 2022, the undersigned denied plaintiff’s motion to compel disclosure of these 28 documents by order filed May 23, 2022. (ECF No. 41.) 1 On May 23, 2022, defendants submitted a more comprehensive set of PREA investigation 2 documents. Defendants informed the court that they recently became aware of the more 3 comprehensive set of PREA investigation documents. On July 27, 2022, the undersigned ordered 4 defendants to resubmit the PREA investigation documents submitted May 23, 2022 with 5 proposed reactions. 6 On or around August 17, 2022, defendants submitted the PREA investigation documents 7 with proposed redactions. These documents contain extensive redactions. The grounds of all of 8 the proposed redactions are not clear to the undersigned. For this reason, defendants are ordered 9 to submit a supplemental affidavit from the Litigation Coordinator or other appropriate official 10 addressing the following proposed redactions: AGOOOOO41-54, 56, 66-72, 75, 76, except for 11 the last two paragraphs, 78, 79. Hall v. Tehrani, 2011 WL 3267759, at *1 (N.D. Cal. July 29, 12 2011) (“If defendants made a sufficient threshold showing, the court should ‘order an in camera 13 review and offer defendant[s] an opportunity to submit a brief and additional supporting material 14 (e.g., a supplemental affidavit).’”) (quoting Kelly v. San Jose, 114 F.R.D. 653, 671 (N.D. Cal. 15 1987). The supplemental affidavit shall address the specific safety and security concerns 16 associated with each of the documents identified above.1 17 The undersigned observes that on August 17, 2022, defendants filed a request to seal a 18 document. (ECF No. 64.) The document defendants request be sealed is one of the PREA 19 investigation documents for which defendants do not request redactions, i.e., AGOOOO58. In 20 the supplemental briefing, defendants shall clarify that they are not requesting redaction of 21 AGOOOOO58. If defendants request redaction of AGOOOOO58, defendants shall include 22 proposed redactions of AGOOOOO58 with the supplemental affidavit and address the safety and 23 security concerns associated with this document in the supplemental affidavit. 24 1 On February 10, 2022, defendants submitted the declaration of Litigation Coordinator Takehara 25 addressing the safety and security concerns associated with the PREA investigation documents. (ECF No. 28-2.) It is unclear if Litigation Coordinator Takehara considered all of the PREA 26 investigation documents later submitted on May 23, 2022, in the declaration submitted February 27 10, 2022. The declaration of Litigation Coordinator Takehara submitted February 10, 2022, also did not address the specific safety and security concerns associated with each of the PREA 28 investigation documents containing proposed redactions identified above. ] Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that within twenty-one days of the date of this 2 || order, defendants shall submit the supplemental affidavit in support of their proposed redaction of 3 | the PREA investigation documents, as discussed above, to kjnorders@caed.uscourts. gov. 4 || Dated: November 1, 2022 Foci) Aharon 6 KENDALL J. NE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 7 8 Rich975.supp 9 10 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28