Coleman, et al v. Schwarzenegger, et al

Filing 7191

ORDER signed by Chief District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 6/2/2021 GRANTING 7146 Plaintiff-Intervenor Lipsey's Motion for leave to conduct discovery. Fact Discovery by 10/29/2021. See 7130 Joint Statement. The parties shall disclose expert s by 11/19/2021, and shall disclose rebuttal experts by 12/3/2021. All expert discovery shall be completed by 12/17/2021. Dispositive and Daubert Motions filed and served by 1/7/2022. If necessary, an evidentiary hearing will be set for a date in May 2022 by subsequent order of the court.(Reader, L) Modified on 6/3/2021 (Reader, L).

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RALPH COLEMAN, et al., 12 Plaintiffs, 13 14 15 v. No. 2:90-cv-0520 KJM KJN P ORDER GAVIN NEWSOM, et al., Defendants. 16 17 18 As permitted by court order, ECF No. 7134, plaintiff-intervenor Christopher 19 Lipsey (hereafter Lipsey) has filed a motion for leave to conduct discovery. ECF No. 7146. 20 Defendants oppose the motion, ECF No. 7165, and Lipsey has filed a reply, ECF No. 7181. After 21 review of the papers, and good cause appearing, the court finds as follows. 22 First, defendants do not dispute Lipsey’s contention that discovery can be and has 23 been authorized in these remedial proceedings. Instead, defendants argue that discovery should 24 either be denied in light of information already available to Lipsey and in view of defendants’ 25 offer to provide informal responses to “specific questions,” ECF No. 7165, or limited to discovery 26 focused on the claim for which intervention has been authorized: that the Guard One suicide 27 prevention monitoring system “causes sleep deprivation in violation of the Eighth Amendment to 28 1 1 the United States Constitution.” ECF No. 6487 at 3.1 In reply, Lipsey agrees that discovery is 2 limited to the foregoing claim in intervention and contends the purpose of the instant motion is 3 only to seek permission to propound discovery; Lipsey also contends that disputes over specific 4 requests should be resolved as necessary once the parties have met and conferred and, as 5 necessary, sought the court’s resolution. ECF No. 7181 at 4. 6 In granting Lipsey’s motion to intervene, the court found his claim “presents a 7 question of law and fact directly relevant to the implementation of the remedial plan in this case.” 8 ECF No. 6487 at 3. To the extent resolution of the factual question requires additional discovery 9 to ensure its fair presentation and resolution, such discovery should and will be permitted. As the 10 parties correctly agree, such discovery will be limited to the Eighth Amendment claim presented 11 in Lipsey’s Complaint in Intervention, ECF No. 6941. The court will resolve disputes, if any, 12 about specific discovery requests if and when they are presented to the court in accordance with 13 the applicable Federal Rules of Civil Procedures and Local Rules of Court. 14 The parties also have filed a joint statement regarding a proposed schedule to 15 adjudicate Lipsey’s claim, ECF No. 7130; the proposed schedule will be approved and adopted in 16 this order, as set forth below. 17 In accordance with the above and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY 18 ORDERED that: 19 1. 20 7146, is GRANTED; 21 2. 22 2021. See ECF No. 7130. Plaintiff-intervenor Lipsey’s motion for leave to conduct discovery, ECF No. All fact discovery shall be conducted so that it is completed by October 29, 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 Lipsey has already been granted leave to “conduct limited discovery to obtain information from which to identify the administrative complaints filed by both Coleman class members and non-class member inmates related to the use of Guard One at all CDCR institutions where it is currently in use.” ECF No. 6487 at 4. 2 1 3. The schedule proposed by the parties in the Joint Statement filed April 19, 2 2021 is approved and adopted in full. Accordingly, in addition to the fact 3 discovery deadline set in paragraph 2 above: 4 a. The parties shall disclose experts on or before November 19, 2021; 5 b. The parties shall disclose rebuttal experts on or before December 3, 6 2021; 7 c. All expert discovery shall be completed by December 17, 2021; 8 d. Dispositive and Daubert motions shall be filed and served on or before 9 January 7, 2022, and shall be noticed for hearing and briefing in accordance with 10 11 12 13 the provisions of Local Rule 230. e. If necessary, an evidentiary hearing will be set for a date in May 2022 by subsequent order of court. DATED: June 2, 2021. 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?