Haynes v. Sisto et al
Filing
103
ORDER signed by Circuit Judge Susan P. Graber on 5/4/12, ORDERING that the exhibits to Plaintiff's reply declaration in support of his motion to compel further document production shall be SEALED. Plaintiff's 95 motion to compel discovery is GRANTED in PART and DENIED in PART. (Kastilahn, A)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
SACRAMENTO DIVISION
11
12
ROBERT HAYNES,
13
CIV S-08-2177-SPG (PC)
Plaintiff,
14
15
ORDER (1) APPROVING PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST
TO SEAL DOCUMENTS, AND (2) GRANTING, IN
PART, PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL
DISCOVERY
vs.
D.K. SISTO et al.,
16
Defendants.
17
/
18
19
The court hereby approves Plaintiff's request to seal documents, and grants, in part, Plaintiff's
motion to compel discovery.
20
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:
21
1. The exhibits to Plaintiff's reply declaration in support of his motion to compel further
22
document production shall be sealed.
23
2. The court DENIES Plaintiff's motion to compel production of an "Incident Management
24
File." Plaintiff has provided no basis to support his belief that the requested documents exist in the
25
format requested or that Defendant has failed to produce any subsidiary documents that would be
26
found in that format.
27
///
28
///
-1-
1
3. The court DENIES Plaintiff's motion to compel production of Attachments C & D to the
2
"unlock procedural guidelines." However, if Defendants uncover responsive documents in their
3
continuing review of their records, they shall produce those documents as soon as they are found.
4
4. The court DENIES Plaintiff's motion to compel production of documents received or
5
authored by Secretary Tilton regarding the challenged events. However, if Defendants uncover
6
responsive documents in their continuing review of their records, they shall produce those
7
documents as soon as they are found.
8
9
5. The court DENIES Plaintiff's motion to compel production of documents related to the
"Emergency Operations Policy" because Plaintiff has withdrawn that request.
10
6. The court GRANTS Plaintiff's motion to compel production of the "Release Assessment
11
Plant" referred to in documents already produced by Defendants. The request is sufficiently specific
12
because it asks only for documents already identified in documents authored and produced by
13
Defendants.
14
7. The court GRANTS Plaintiff's motion to compel production as to the remainder of the
15
documents requested, all of which are relevant and likely to lead to admissible evidence. Production
16
of those documents shall be under seal, and the parties are directed to confer to establish an
17
acceptable procedure for doing so.
18
IT IS SO ORDERED.
19
20
Dated:
May 4, 2012
21
22
/s/ Susan P. Graber
UNITED STATES CIRCUIT JUDGE
23
24
25
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?