Garcia v. Juarez

Filing 56

ORDER GRANTING Plaintiff's 53 Motion for Issuance of Subpoena Duces Tecum and Placing Parties on Notice that the Subpoena to the CDCR shall issue after Fifteen Days from the Date of Service of this Order, signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 12/8/2015. (15- Day Deadline) (Martin-Gill, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12

ROBERTO M. GARCIA, JR.,
Plaintiff,

13

vs.

14
15

MATTHEW M. JUAREZ, JR.,
Defendant.

16
17

1:12-cv-00750-AWI-EPG (PC)
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF=S
REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF
SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM, AND
PLACING PARTIES ON NOTICE
THAT THE SUBPOENA TO THE
CDCR SHALL ISSUE AFTER
FIFTEEN DAYS FROM THE DATE OF
SERVICE OF THIS ORDER
(ECF No. 53.)

18
19
20
21
22

I.

BACKGROUND

23

Roberto M. Garcia, Jr. (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

24

pauperis with this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On May 8, 2012, Plaintiff

25

filed the Complaint commencing this action. (Doc. 1.)

26

On November 30, 2015, Plaintiff filed a request for issuance of a subpoena against non-

27

party California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR), commanding the

28

production of documents. (ECF No. 53.)
1

1

II.

REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUBPOENA

2

“A command in a subpoena to produce documents, electronically stored information, or

3

tangible things requires the responding person to permit inspection, copying, testing, or

4

sampling of the materials.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(a)(1)(D). “If the subpoena commands the

5

production of documents, electronically stored information, or tangible things or the inspection

6

of premises before trial, then before it is served on the person to whom it is directed, a notice

7

and a copy of the subpoena must be served on each party.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(a)(4). Under

8

Rule 26 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, “[p]arties may obtain discovery regarding any

9

non-privileged matter that is relevant to any party's claim or defense and proportional to the

10

needs of the case, considering the importance of the issues at stake in the action, the amount in

11

controversy, the parties’ relative access to relevant information, the parties’ resources, the

12

importance of the discovery in resolving the issues, and whether the burden or expense of the

13

proposed discovery outweighs its likely benefit. Information within this scope of discovery

14

need not be admissible in evidence to be discoverable.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b).

15

Plaintiff seeks copies of the following documents and reports:

16

(1)

Incident Commander Review Report of May 23, 2011;

17

(2)

Regional Use of Force Coordinator report, CDCR form 3034-A (9/09);

18

(3)

Report of Executive Review Committee use of force/misconduct allegation,

19

CDCR form 3036-A (9/09) concerning this matter;

20

(4)

Report of Executive Committee critique and qualitative evaluation/analysis;

21

(5)

Copy from the report of the investigation conducted by Internal Affairs Agent

22

23

M. Dunlop;
(6)

24

Copy of the video recording by Lt. Ostransa and Sgt. Kirby of Plaintiff’s
interview; and

25

(7)

26

Plaintiff’s request for issuance of a subpoena, to the extent he seeks information about

27

the excessive force incident on May 23, 2011, appears relevant and proportional to the needs of

28

the case pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b). Although there may be issues

A picture of where the event took place.

2

1

regarding confidentiality and security, they can be dealt with through a privilege log or in

2

camera review. Thus, the Court shall grant Plaintiff’s request. Plaintiff is proceeding pro se

3

and in forma pauperis, and is entitled to service of the subpoena by the United States Marshal.

4

28 U.S.C. ' 1915(d). Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45(b)(1), this order provides

5

the requisite notice to the parties that the Court will, after fifteen days from the date of service

6

of this order, issue the subpoena and direct the United States Marshal to effect personal service.

7

III.

CONCLUSION

8

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

9

1.

10
11

Plaintiff=s request for the issuance of a subpoena, filed on November 30, 2015, is
GRANTED; and

2.

Pursuant to Rule 45(b)(1), the parties are placed on notice that a subpoena duces

12

tecum to the CDCR shall be issued after fifteen (15) days from the date of

13

service of this order.

14
15
16

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

December 8, 2015

/s/
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

17
18
19
20
21
22

23
24
25
26
27
28
3