Tripati v. Corizon, Inc. et al

Filing 306

ORDER that the Motion for Procedural Order (Doc. 295 ) is DENIED. It is further Ordered that the Motion to Seal (Doc. 297 ) is GRANTED for the Clerk of the Court to file the lodged Motion for Summary Judgment and Statement of Facts (Docs. 298 , [ 299]) UNDER SEAL. It is further Ordered that the Motion for Leave to file the Motion for Summary Judgment (lodged 298 ) in excess of the page limit (Doc. 300 ) is GRANTED. It is further Ordered that the Motion for Appointment of Expert (Doc. 301 ) is DENIED. It is further Ordered that the Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply (Doc. 302 ) is DENIED (see attached Order for complete details). Signed by Senior Judge David C Bury on 11/20/2018. (MFR)

1

WO

2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

Anant Kumar Tripati,
Plaintiff,

10
11

ORDER

v.

12

No. CV-13-00615-TUC-DCB

Corizon Incorporated, et al.,

13

Defendants.

14
15

On November 9, 2018, Defendants filed a Motion to Exceed Page Limit and

16

lodged a Motion for Summary Judgment. Simultaneously, Defendants filed a Motion to

17

Seal the Motion for Summary Judgment. Both will be granted. The excess pages are

18

warranted because the claims involve six discrete areas of medical care and treatment

19

spanning five years. Likewise, sealing the motion should alleviate concern the Plaintiff

20

may have regarding his medical record being in the public domain.

21

On November 5, 2018, the Plaintiff filed a Motion for Procedural Order related to

22

his Motion for Summary Judgment which he filed on October 18, 2018. He seeks an

23

Order from this Court similar to a directive issued in 2016 in another case related to

24

another grievance whereby he was allowed to view legal CDs, i.e., do legal research,

25

every other day for three hours. Attached to his motion, the Court sees an Informal

26

Inmate Complaint Response dated June 8, 2018, from CO III D. Brennan confirming that

27

this special arrangement for the 2016 case is ended and unless there is a Court Order,

28

Tripati shall not receive any additional time for legal reviews and can complete his legal

1

reviews during his assigned CO III’s normal work hours and that these hours “should be

2

no more than 3 hours a day up to 3 days a week during programs (sic) normal working

3

hours Monday through Friday.” (Motion Exhibits (Doc. 295-1) at 12.)

4

The Court has no reason to believe that the normal working hour schedule for

5

legal research will impede Plaintiff’s access to this Court in this case. A directive like

6

that issued in the 2016 case will not issue from this Court unless Plaintiff can show that

7

the prison is not affording him ample opportunity to conduct the legal research necessary

8

to prepare the Response to the Motion for Summary Judgment and his Reply in support

9

of his Motion for Summary Judgment.

10

The Court denies Plaintiff’s request to appoint an expert to testify that counsel for

11

Defendants should have known it was a violation of state and federal law for Corizon to

12

have released his medical records without his signed release. The Court denies the

13

Motion to Enlarge Time for the Response to the Motion for Summary Judgment to allow

14

time to obtain the above requested expert opinion.

15

Accordingly,

16

IT IS ORDERED that the Motion for Procedural Order (Doc. 295) is DENIED.

17

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion to Seal (Doc. 297) is GRANTED

18

for the Clerk of the Court to file the lodged Motion for Summary Judgment and

19

Statement of Facts (Docs. 298, 299) UNDER SEAL.

20
21
22
23
24
25

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion for Leave to file the Motion for
Summary Judgment (lodged 298) in excess of the page limit (Doc. 300) is GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion for Appointment of Expert (Doc.
301) is DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion for Extension of Time to File
Response/Reply (Doc. 302) is DENIED.

26

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT THERE SHALL BE NO FURTHER

27

EXTENSIONS OF TIME FOR PLAINTIFF TO FILE THE RESPONSE AND REPLY.

28

The time for filing these briefs shall commence as of the filing date of this Order. Failure

-2-

1

to file the Response shall be deemed a consent to the summary granting of Defendant’s

2

Motion for Summary Judgment. (LRCiv. 7.2)(i).

3

Dated this 20th day of November, 2018.

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-3-