(PC) Matlock v. Kern County ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RICHARD A. MATLOCK, Case No. 1:19-cv-01368-JLT-BAK(EPG) (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER REQUIRING PARTIES TO EXCHANGE DOCUMENTS 13 v. 14 DONNY YOUNGBLOOD, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Richard A. Matlock is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights 18 action filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau 19 of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). On April 4, 2022, the Court issued an order requiring the 20 parties to file scheduling and discovery statements. (ECF No. 46.) The parties have now filed 21 their statements. (ECF Nos. 48, 49.) 22 The Court has reviewed this case and the parties’ statements. In an effort to secure the 23 just, speedy, and inexpensive disposition of this action,1 the Court will direct that certain 24 documents central to the dispute be produced promptly.2 25 1 See, e.g., United States v. W.R. Grace, 526 F.3d 499, 508–09 (9th Cir. 2008) (“We begin with the principle that the district court is charged with effectuating the speedy and orderly administration of justice. There is universal 26 acceptance in the federal courts that, in carrying out this mandate, a district court has the authority to enter pretrial case management and discovery orders designed to ensure that the relevant issues to be tried are identified, that the 27 parties have an opportunity to engage in appropriate discovery and that the parties are adequately and timely prepared so that the trial can proceed efficiently and intelligibly.”). 1 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that: 2 1. Each party has sixty days from the date of service of this order to serve opposing 3 parties, or their counsel, if represented, with copies of the following documents 4 and/or evidence that they have in their possession, custody, or control, to the 5 extent the parties have not already done so:3 6 a. Plaintiff’s CJIS records; Kern County Lerdo facility “red books” for 7 October 2, 2017;4 8 b. Any grievances filed by Plaintiff and any other documents regarding 9 exhaustion of claims; 10 c. Incident report regarding the incident alleged in the complaint; 11 d. All of Plaintiff’s medical records related to the incident; 12 e. Witness statements and evidence that were generated from investigation(s) 13 related to the event(s) at issue in the complaint.5 14 f. Video recordings and photographs related to the incident(s) at issue in the 15 complaint, including video recordings and photographs of Plaintiff taken 16 following the incident(s), as part of the investigation into Defendant’s use 17 of force, and in relation to Plaintiff’s grievance(s).6 18 g. Applicable policies and procedures, if any, governing the housing of 19 vulnerable inmates in protective custody and the institution’s protection of 20 inmates from attacks by other inmates. 21 22 information without a discovery request.”). 3 Defense counsel is requested to obtain these documents from Plaintiff’s institution(s) of confinement. If 23 defense counsel is unable to do so, defense counsel should inform Plaintiff that a third party subpoena is required. 4 Defendants indicate these documents are to be used at trial. 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 preserved.”). 26 The Court notes that Defendants only need to produce documents such as a Confidential Appeal Inquiry or a Use of Force Critique to the extent those documents contain witness statements related to the incident(s) alleged in 27 the complaint and/or evidence related to the incident(s) alleged in the complaint that will not be provided to Plaintiff separately. 1 2. If any party obtains documents and/or other evidence described above later in the 2 case from a third party, that party shall provide all other parties with copies of the 3 documents and/or evidence within thirty days. 4 3. Parties do not need to produce documents or evidence that they have already 5 produced. 6 4. Parties do not need to produce documents or evidence that were provided to them 7 by the opposing party. 8 5. Parties may object to producing any of the above-listed documents and/or 9 evidence. Objections shall be filed with the Court and served on all other parties 10 within sixty days from the date of service of this order (or within thirty days of 11 receiving additional documents and/or evidence). The objection should include 12 the basis for not providing the documents and/or evidence. If Defendant(s) object 13 based on the official information privilege, Defendant(s) shall follow the 14 procedures described in the Court’s scheduling order. Ifa party files an objection, 15 all other parties have fourteen days from the date the objection is filed to file a 16 response. If any party files a response to an objection, the Court will issue a ruling 17 on the objection. 18 19 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: _ May 3, 2022 [Jee hey □ 4 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 22 23 24 25 26 27 28