Gann v. Kokor et al

Filing 38

ORDER RESETTING Deadline for Plaintiff to File Second Amended Complaint with Information Identifying Defendants Doe 1, Doe 2, and Doe 3; Thirty (30) Day Deadline signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 8/9/2021. (Sant Agata, S)

Download PDF
Case 1:18-cv-00084-AWI-BAM Document 38 Filed 08/09/21 Page 1 of 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 NATHANIEL MARCUS GANN, 12 Plaintiff, THIRTY (30) DAY DEADLINE v. 14 ORDER RESETTING DEADLINE FOR PLAINTIFF TO FILE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT WITH INFORMATION IDENTIFYING DEFENDANTS DOE 1, DOE 2, AND DOE 3 Defendants. 13 KOKOR, et al., 15 Case No. 1:18-cv-00084-AWI-BAM (PC) 16 17 Plaintiff Nathaniel Marcus Gann (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in 18 forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action proceeds on 19 Plaintiff’s first amended complaint against Defendants Doe 1, Doe 2, and Doe 3 for deliberate 20 indifference to serious medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment. 21 On June 23, 2021, the Court granted Plaintiff’s request for a subpoena duces tecum 22 directing the Warden of CSATF to produce “The Medical Staff Sign-In for 2nd Watch for 23 December 21, 22, and 23 for the year 2015 for Facility E, including titles such as RN, LVN, P&S, 24 etc.” to allow Plaintiff the opportunity to locate the identities of the Doe Defendants. (ECF No. 25 32.) After receiving the Warden’s response, Plaintiff filed a motion to compel compliance with 26 the subpoena. (ECF No. 34.) The Court granted the motion in part on July 15, 2021, finding that 27 a further response was appropriate to allow the Warden of CSATF to either produce the requested 28 documents or to provide further explanation as to the extent of the search for the requested 1 Case 1:18-cv-00084-AWI-BAM Document 38 Filed 08/09/21 Page 2 of 2 1 records. (ECF No. 35.) The Court found that sanctions were not warranted at that time and 2 vacated the deadline for Plaintiff to provide the names of the Doe Defendants, to be reset 3 following resolution of the subpoena. (Id.) 4 Currently before the Court is a response from the Litigation Coordinator of CSATF, filed 5 July 30, 2021. (ECF No. 37.) In the response, the Litigation Coordinator confirms that the 6 requested records were located after a second search that included a search beyond the facility’s 7 electronic records system. The requested records were mailed to Plaintiff on July 27, 2021 and 8 are also attached to the response filed with the Court. (Id.) 9 Based on this response, it appears Plaintiff has now received the requested records in 10 compliance with the subpoena duces tecum. The Court therefore finds it appropriate to grant 11 Plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint and to reset the deadline for Plaintiff to file a second 12 amended complaint identifying Defendants Doe 1, Doe 2, and Doe 3. Once the Court has 13 received enough information to locate the defendants for service of process, the Court will issue 14 an order directing service on the defendants. 15 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 16 1. Within thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff shall file a 17 Second Amended Complaint substituting the names of Defendants Doe 1, Doe 2, 18 and Doe 3 and providing enough information to locate the defendants for service 19 of process; and 20 2. 21 If Plaintiff fails to comply with this order, this action will be dismissed for failure to prosecute and failure to obey a court order. 22 23 24 25 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: /s/ Barbara August 9, 2021 A. McAuliffe _ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 26 27 28 2

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?