Cauthen v. Rivera et al

Filing 57

ORDER Denying Plaintiff's Motion Regarding Evidence 55 , signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 5/30/14. (Verduzco, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

DAVID SAFIDI CAUTHEN,

12

Plaintiff,

13

v.

14

I. RIVERA, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 1:12cv01747 LJO DLB (PC)
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION REGARDING EVIDENCE
(Document 55)

17
18

Plaintiff David Safidi Cauthen (“Plaintiff”) is a prisoner in the custody of the California

19

Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (“CDCR”). Plaintiff is proceeding pro se in this civil

20

rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

21

Plaintiff filed this action on October 26, 2012. On July 15, 2013, the Court ordered that the

22

action proceed on the following claims: (1) excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment

23

against Defendants Rivera, Negrete, Northcutt, Arreola, King and Waddle; (2) unreasonable search in

24

violation of the Fourth and Eighth Amendments against Defendants Rivera, Negrete and Waddle; (3)

25

deliberate indifference to a serious medical need in violation of the Eighth Amendment against

26
27

Defendant Mackey; and (4) violation of the First Amendment and RLUIPA against Defendants
Rivera, Negrete and Waddle.

28
1

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

The action is currently in discovery.
On May 19, 2014, Plaintiff filed a motion entitled, “Motion to Insure Safe Keepings of
Plaintiff’s Evidence.” Plaintiff states that Defendants and others have been threatening to seize
evidence and legal documents related to this action. He requests that the Court store his evidence on
the docket so that it will be preserved.
Plaintiff’s motion came with a stack of original exhibits. The Court sent the exhibits back, as
the Court cannot serve as a repository for the parties’ evidence. Plaintiff’s motion does not change
this rule. The parties may not file evidence with the Court until the course of litigation brings the
evidence into question (eg., when a motion for summary judgment is filed).
Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion is DENIED.

11
12
13
14

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Dennis

May 30, 2014

L. Beck

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2