Bryant v. Romero et al

Filing 126

ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION COMPELLING DISCLOSURE OF DISCOVERY 109 AND ORDER DIRECTING PERSONAL SERVICE OF SUBPOENAS DUCES TECUM WITHIN SEVEN DAYS BY UNITED STATES MARSHAL WITHOUT PREPAYMENT OF COSTS RE 95 signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 7/29/2016. (Lundstrom, T)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 KEVIN D. BRYANT, 12 13 14 15 Plaintiff, v. R. ROMERO, et al., Defendants. 16 17 18 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No.: 1:12-cv-02074 DAD DLB PC ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION COMPELLING DISCLOSURE OF DISCOVERY [ECF No. 109] ORDER DIRECTING PERSONAL SERVICE OF SUBPOENAS DUCES TECUM WITHIN SEVEN DAYS BY UNITED STATES MARSHAL WITHOUT PREPAYMENT OF COSTS [ECF No. 95] Plaintiff Kevin D. Bryant (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights 19 action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1983. This action is proceeding against Defendants Waddle and 20 Castellanos for violating Plaintiff’s First Amendment rights by retaliating against him. 21 On March 29, 2016, the Court issued an order authorizing the issuance of a subpoena duces 22 tecum directed Christian Pfeiffer, Warden of Kern Valley State Prison. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4, 45; 28 23 U.S.C. § 1915(d). On April 21, 2016, Plaintiff filed objections and motion for reconsideration of the 24 Court’s order. On June 3, 2016, the Court granted reconsideration in part and authorized the issuance 25 of additional subpoenas duces tecum directed to Christian Pfeiffer. On June 27, 2016, the Court 26 directed personal service of the subpoenas duces tecum, however, the initial March 29, 2016, 27 subpoena duces tecum was not included. 28 1 1 2 3 4 On July 11, 2016, Plaintiff filed the instant motion for an order compelling the discovery ordered by the Court in the March 29, 2016, order. Plaintiff complains that Christian Pfeiffer has failed to respond to the subpoena duces tecum. However, the subpoenas duces tecum have not yet been served on Warden Christian Pfeiffer. Thus, he was not obligated to produce the documents. 5 6 The requisite notice having been issued pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45(a)(4), it is HEREBY ORDERED that: 7 8 1. The Clerk of the Court shall forward the following documents to the United States Marshal (USM): 9 a. 10 One (1) completed and issued subpoena duces tecum to be served on: Christian Pfeiffer Warden of Kern Valley State Prison 3000 West Cecil Avenue Delano, CA 93216 11 12 13 b. One (1) completed USM-285 form; and 14 c. Two (2) copies of this order, one to accompany the subpoena and one for the 15 16 USM; 2. Within seven (7) calendar days from the date of this order, the USM is DIRECTED to 17 serve the subpoenas in accordance with the provisions of Rule 45 of the Federal Rules of Civil 18 Procedure; 19 3. The USM SHALL effect personal service of the subpoena duces tecum, along with a 20 copy of this order, upon the individual/entity named in the subpoena pursuant to Rule 45 of the 21 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and 28 U.S.C. § 566(c); and 22 4. Within ten (10) days after personal service is effected, the USM SHALL file the returns 23 of service, along with the costs subsequently incurred in effecting service, and said costs shall be 24 enumerated on the USM-285 form. 25 26 27 28 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: /s/ Dennis July 29, 2016 L. Beck UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Attachment 1 You are commanded to produce and permit inspection and copying of the following documents, including but not limited to documents which are retained in paper, electronically stored, preserved in microfiche, etc. No. 1: Produce any and all records, reports, and recorded interviews of internal investigations conducted by the CDCR, including but not limited to OIA and ISU investigations, concerning Plaintiff’s allegations of staff misconduct of Defendants Constance Waddle and E. Castellanos, to the extent they exist and have not already been provided to Plaintiff in discovery. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

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?