Samuels v. Adame et al
Filing
94
ORDER Granting Plaintiff's Motion for Court Clothing, signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A Boone on 3/4/13. (Gonzalez, R)
1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
ROBERT EARL SAMUELS,
CASE NO. 1:09-cv-01320-SAB PC
9
Plaintiff,
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION FOR COURT CLOTHING
10
v.
11
G. ADAME, et al.,
12
Defendants.
13
/
14
15
Plaintiff Robert Earl Samuels (“Plaintiff”) is a California state prisoner proceeding pro se and
16
in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This case is proceeding
17
on Plaintiff’s first amended complaint, filed December 31, 2009, against Defendants G. Adame, P.
18
Gentry, B. Medrano, R. Nicholas, F. Rivera, E. Sailer, and D. Snyder for excessive force, and against
19
Defendant C. Farnsworth for deliberate indifference to a serious medical need in violation of the
20
Eighth Amendment. This matter is set for jury trial on March 12, 2013 before the undersigned.
21
22
A telephonic pretrial hearing occurred on March 4, 2013. During the hearing, Plaintiff
requested that his family be permitted to send him clothing to wear during trial. Accordingly,
23
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
24
1.
Plaintiff’s motion for his family to be permitted to send him appropriate courtroom
25
attire is granted, subject to the security concerns of the California Department of
26
Corrections and Rehabilitation;
27
2.
The clothing is to be sent to the following address:
28
1
1
Robert Earl Samuels CDCR No. F-61946
c/o Will Adams, Litigation Coordinator
Kern Valley State Prison
3000 West Cecil Avenue
Delano, CA 93216
2
3
4
3.
5
The Clerk of the Court is directed to fax a copy of this order to the litigation
coordinator at Kern Valley State Prison.
6
7
IT IS SO ORDERED.
8
Dated:
i1eed4
March 4, 2013
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?