Baston v. Yett, et al.
ORDER RESERVING RULING on and DIRECTING Response to Plaintiff's 32 Motion to Bar Transfer; ORDER GRANTING 33 Motion Requesting Courts Waive Requirement to Serve Separate Copy of Court Filings upon Defendants; Response to be Filed within 14 Days signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 12/13/2017. (Sant Agata, S)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
ORDER RESERVING RULING ON AND
DIRECTING RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION TO BAR TRANSFER
Case No. 1:16-cv-01564-LJO-EPG
ORDER GRANTING MOTION
REQUESTING COURTS WAIVE
REQUIREMENT TO SERVE SEPARATE
COPY OF COURT FILINGS UPON
EDWARD M. YETT, et al.,
(ECF Nos. 32, 33)
RESPONSE TO BE FILED WITHIN 14
A. Motion to Bar Transfer
Elgan Baston (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in
this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants failed to
protect him from an attack while he was incarcerated at California Correctional Institution
(“CCI”) in Tehachapi, California.1
Plaintiff has filed a motion requesting the Court to bar his transfer from Jamestown State
Prison to CCI. (ECF No. 32.) Plaintiff has indicated fears “reprisal/revenge” from the
Defendants in this case, who are still officers employed at CCI, and another assault similar to the
incident upon which his Complaint in this case is based.
The Court construes the motion as a request for injunctive relief2 and directs Defendants
to file a response to the motion within 14 days. Upon consideration of the response, the
undersigned will issue Findings and Recommendations to the assigned District Judge.
Both Jamestown and CCI are correctional facilities under the authority of the California Department of
26 Corrections and Rehabilitation (“CDCR”).
See Winter v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 20, 129 S. Ct. 365, 374, 172 L. Ed. 2d 249 (2008)
27 (providing that preliminary injunction will issue when the movant establishes that “he is likely to succeed on the
merits, that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief, that the balance of equities
28 tips in his favor, and that an injunction is in the public interest”).
B. Motion Requesting Waiver from Service Requirement
Plaintiff has filed a motion requesting relief from the requirement that he also serve a
3 copy his Court filings upon opposing counsel. The federal rules require parties to serve upon
4 opposing counsel any "pleading filed after the original complaint" and "written motion... notice...
5 or any similar paper." Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(a); CAED-LR 135. This service requirement is in
6 addition to the requirement that the document be filed with the court.
Plaintiff’s motion indicates that he is housed in administrative segregation and has no
8 access to a copy machine.
The Court concludes that a hardship exists and will grant the requested relief. The Court
10 finds that prejudice to Defendants is minimal due to the fact that their counsel is registered with
11 the Court CM\ECF electronic filing system and will receive a copy of all documents filed by the
12 Plaintiff through this system.
However, Plaintiff should be aware that if he is served with discovery including a request
14 for production of document, requests for admission, or interrogatories, he must produce
15 responsive documents to the Defendants. Such discovery-related documents are generally not
16 filed with the Court unless they are being used as an exhibit in support of or in opposition to a
17 pending motion.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
December 13, 2017
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?