Edwards v. High Desert State Prison et al

Filing 32

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 9/28/11 granting 30 Motion to conduct plaintiffs deposition via video conference; Nothing in his order shall be interpreted as requiring any penal institution to btain video conferencing equipment if it is not already available. (Dillon, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

BRIAN DARNELL EDWARDS,

11
12

Plaintiff,

No. 2: 10-cv-3461 WBS KJN P

vs.

13

HIGH DESERT STATE PRISON, et al.,

14

Defendants.

15

/

16
17

ORDER

Pending before the court is defendants’ September 22, 2011 motion to conduct
plaintiff’s deposition via video conference.

18

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

19

1. Defendants’ motion to conduct plaintiff’s deposition via video conference

20

(Dkt. No. 30) is granted;

21

2. Nothing in this order shall be interpreted as requiring any penal institution to

22

obtain video conferencing equipment if it is not already available.

23

DATED: September 28, 2011

24

_____________________________________
KENDALL J. NEWMAN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

25
26

ed3461.dep

1