Buchanan v. Santos et al

Filing 57

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 3/22/2012 to return discovery documents to Defendant, A. Santos re 55 Notice of Filing / Lodging Document in Paper. (Lundstrom, T)

1
2
3
4
5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

WHITTIER BUCHANAN,

9

Plaintiff,

10

vs.

11

1:08-cv-01174-AWI-GSA-PC
ORDER FOR CLERK TO RETURN
DISCOVERY DOCUMENTS TO
DEFENDANT
(Doc. 55.)

A. SANTOS, et al.,
ORDER CLOSING DISCOVERY

12
13

Defendants.
_____________________________/

14

Whittier Buchanan (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action

15

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action now proceeds on Plaintiff's original Complaint, filed on

16

August 11, 2008, against Correctional Officer A. Santos ("Defendant"), for use of excessive force in

17

violation of the Eighth Amendment.1 (Doc. 1.)

18

On October 12, 2010, Plaintiff filed a motion to compel production of documents from

19

Defendant. (Doc. 47.) On May 26, 2011, the Court entered an order granting in part Plaintiff's motion

20

to compel, finding that Plaintiff was entitled to documents from Defendant's personnel file concerning

21

allegations of use of excessive force, falsification of information, or planting of evidence by Defendant.

22

(Doc. 52.) The Court ordered Defendant to submit to the Court, under seal for in camera review, all

23

documents found in Defendant’s California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation ("CDCR")

24

personnel file concerning any allegations of use of excessive force, falsification of information, or

25
1

27

On June 8, 2009, the Court dismissed defendants Collins, Yates, Garrison, Duty, Reyes, and McBryde from this
action, based on Plaintiff's failure to state any claims against them. (Doc. 15.) On June 8, 2010, the Court dismissed
defendant Mendoza from this action via defendants’ motion to dismiss, based on Plaintiff's failure to exhaust administrative
remedies. (Doc. 44.) Therefore, defendant Santos is the only defendant remaining in this action.

28

1

26

1

planting of evidence by Defendant, relating to incidents occurring before October 23, 2007, but not

2

further back than October 23, 2002, with certain confidential information redacted. Id. On June 28,

3

2011, the Court received a redacted copy of Defendant’s entire CDCR personnel file, under seal, for in

4

camera review. (Doc. 55.)

5

The Court has thoroughly examined each document contained in Defendant's personnel file and

6

finds no documents concerning allegations of use of excessive force, falsification of information, or

7

planting of evidence by Defendant Santos. As a result, the Court concludes that Plaintiff is not entitled

8

to production of any of the documents submitted to the Court for in camera review. Accordingly, the

9

Court shall direct the Clerk to return the discovery documents to Defendant.

10

Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

11

1.

The Clerk is HEREBY DIRECTED to return the discovery documents, received by the
Court on June 28, 2011 for in camera review, to Defendant; and

12
13

2.

Discovery is now closed in this action.

14
15

IT IS SO ORDERED.

16

Dated:
6i0kij

March 22, 2012

/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2