Caruso v. Johnson et al

Filing 116

ORDER Following Discovery Dispute Hearing re 111 , 112 , 113 , signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 2/19/19. (Gonzalez, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9
10

GINA CARUSO,
Plaintiff,

11
12
13
14

Case No. 1:15-cv-00780-AWI-EPG (PC)
ORDER FOLLOWING DISCOVERY
DISPUTE HEARING

v.

(ECF NOS. 111, 112, & 113)

OFFICER G. SOLORIO, et al.,
Defendants.

15

Gina Caruso (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding in forma pauperis with this civil

16

rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On February 15, 2019, the Court held a

17

Discovery Dispute Hearing (“Hearing”). Counsel Jenny Huang telephonically appeared on

18

behalf of Plaintiff. Counsel Derrek Lee telephonically appeared on behalf of Defendants.

19

For the reasons stated on the record at the Hearing, IT IS ORDERED that:

20

1. To the extent defense counsel believes that information disclosed during the

21

depositions of defendants Martinez and Lopez should be covered and clawed back

22

under the official information privilege, defense counsel has three weeks from the

23

date of this order to submit a request to deem the information privileged

24

retroactively.

25

official information privilege. The material and request shall be filed under seal.

26

Plaintiff has one week following the submission to file a response, which shall also

27

be filed under seal.

28

The request should include the material allegedly subject to the

2. The parties are directed to meet and confer regarding a protective order. The parties
1

1

shall submit a stipulated protected order in compliance with the rulings made at the

2

Hearing (or a red-lined version including disagreements) no later than February 22,

3

2019.

4
5

3. Plaintiff’s counsel is entitled to record depositions herself via audio-video means.
This ruling has no bearing on the admissibility of the recording(s) at trial.

6

4. Plaintiff’s motion to compel the original incident report is denied as moot, because

7

the motion has previously been granted (ECF No. 75). However, Plaintiff has leave

8

to serve up to three interrogatories that seek information regarding efforts made to

9

locate the original incident report. Additionally, the parties are to meet and confer

10

regarding whether Mr. Villegas (phonetic) should be deposed. If the parties cannot

11

come to an agreement, Plaintiff may seek leave to depose Mr. Villegas by filing a

12

supplement to the motion to compel.

13

5. Plaintiff’s motion to compel production of documents related to the investigation

14

interviews is granted. To the extent any further documents are discovered, those

15

documents shall be promptly produced to Plaintiff.

16

6. Within five days of the date of service of this order, Plaintiff may file a supplement

17

to the motion to compel asking for the Court to check redactions on one page of the

18

investigation reports/use of force review addressed under the Court’s previous order

19

(ECF No. 75). Plaintiff’s counsel shall include the page with the redactions. Within

20

five days of the filing of the motion, Defendants shall provide an unredacted copy of

21

that page to the Court for in camera review.

22

appropriate order regarding the redactions.

23
24

The Court will then issue an

7. Plaintiff’s motion for the Court to reconsider its order allowing redaction of the
investigation reports/use of force review is denied, without prejudice.

25

8. Plaintiff is granted permission to depose Dr. Ramos (phonetic) in lieu of Dr. Onyeje.

26

9. Plaintiff has until March 29, 2019, to conduct the depositions that the Court has

27
28

already allowed.
10. After the depositions are complete, the parties shall meet and confer regarding
2

1

advancing the settlement conference. The parties shall email the Court’s courtroom

2

deputy ([e-mail]) by April 12, 2019, to inform the Court

3

whether the parties are interested in advancing the settlement conference.

4

11. Plaintiff’s motion to seal exhibits (see ECF No. 113) is granted. Plaintiff shall file

5

the documents by emailing them to [e-mail].

6
7
8

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

February 19, 2019

/s/
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3