Valson v. Kelso et al

Filing 33

ORDER on Plaintiff's Request for Order Directing Plaintiff's Institution of Confinement to Allow Plaintiff to Make Copies of Scheduling Conference Statement 31 , signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 3/6/2018: Request is DENIED without prejudice. (Hellings, J)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9
10
11
12
13

Case No. 1:14-cv-01420-DAD-EPG (PC)

SILUS M. VALSON,

ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR
ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF’S
INSTITUTION OF CONFINEMENT TO
ALLOW PLAINTIFF TO MAKE COPIES
OF SCHEDULING CONFERENCE
STATEMENT

Plaintiff,
v.
MATTHEW CATE and MARTIN BITER,
Defendants.

(ECF NO. 31)

14
15
16
17

Silus Valson (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in
this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

18

On February 26, 2018, Plaintiff filed a request for an order directing his institution of

19

confinement to allow him to make copies of his scheduling conference statement (“the

20

Request”). Plaintiff states that “Senior Law Librarian Ms. . . . Lirone’s denial was based on the

21

document contained published documentation from MedlinePlus of the National Institute of

22

Health/U.S. National Library of Medicine.” (ECF No. 31, at p. 2)

23

As discussed on the record at the hearing on March 5, 2018, the documents that Plaintiff

24

describes are not needed for his scheduling conference statement. The Court did not require

25

Plaintiff to submit any evidence for the scheduling conference.

26

Plaintiff’s request for an order related to the scheduling conference statement.

Thus, the Court denies

27

However, the Court notes that Plaintiff should be allowed to make copies of documents

28

that he is using to support his case, including documents Plaintiff identified in the Request (the
1

1

documents from the National Institutes of Health/U.S. National Library of Medicine that

2

Plaintiff obtained from his Freedom of Information Act request to the Department of Health

3

and Human Services), because Plaintiff has an obligation to provide documents that he may use

4

to support his claims in this case to Defendants. See, e.g., Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 & 34.

5
6

Thus, Plaintiff’s institution should allow him to make copies of documents necessary
for his case. He has a legal obligation to share those documents with Defendants.

7

If Plaintiff’s institution of confinement does not allow Plaintiff to make copies of

8

documents that are necessary for use in this case, Plaintiff may file a motion with the Court,

9

and the Court may issue an order requiring Plaintiff’s institution of confinement to allow

10
11
12

Plaintiff to make copies.
Accordingly, based on the foregoing, IT IS ORDERED that the Request is DENIED
without prejudice.

13
14
15

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

March 6, 2018

/s/
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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