Nunez v. Porter, et al
Filing
88
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 2/10/17 ORDERING that within 14 days of the date of this order, plaintiff shall provide the court with a copy of the request for production of documents relevant to the at- issue emails; plaintiff shall also identify which specific request for production of documents in response to which defendant produced the emails.(Dillon, M)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
CURTIS NUNEZ, JR.,
12
13
14
15
No. 2: 12-cv-2775 JAM KJN P
Plaintiff,
v.
ORDER
K. M. PORTER, et al.,
Defendants.
16
17
Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding without counsel, with a civil rights action pursuant
18
to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On September 27, 2016, the undersigned granted in part and denied in part
19
plaintiff’s motion to reopen discovery. (ECF No. 82.) The undersigned ordered defendant to
20
respond to the request for admissions and request for production of documents served by plaintiff
21
on December 3, 2015. (Id.)
22
After receiving defendant’s response to his discovery requests, plaintiff filed a motion for
23
in camera review. (ECF No. 84.) Plaintiff alleged that defendant provided him with two redacted
24
emails. (Id.) Plaintiff requested that the court conduct an in camera review of the unredacted
25
versions of the emails to determine whether the redacted information was relevant. (Id.)
26
On November 22, 2016, defendant filed a response to plaintiff’s motion for in camera
27
review. (ECF No. 85.) Defendant stated that the redacted emails concerned information about
28
nonparties and defendant submitted a privilege log to plaintiff to that effect. (Id.) Defendant did
1
1
2
not oppose the court’s in camera review of the emails. (Id.)
On January 19, 2017, the undersigned ordered defendant to submit the at-issue emails for
3
in camera review. (ECF No. 86.) Defendant has now submitted the unredacted emails for in
4
camera review. After reviewing the mails, the undersigned finds that the redacted information is
5
most likely not relevant. However, in an abundance of caution, plaintiff is ordered to submit the
6
request for production of documents relevant to the at-issue emails so that the undersigned may
7
make a final determination regarding relevancy.
8
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that within fourteen days of the date of this
9
order, plaintiff shall provide the court with a copy of the request for production of documents
10
relevant to the at-issue emails; plaintiff shall also identify which specific request for production of
11
documents in response to which defendant produced the emails.
12
Dated: February 10, 2017
13
14
15
16
Nun2775.fb
17
18
19
20
21
22
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?