Plata et al v. Schwarzenegger et al

Filing 2527

ORDER re: 2506 Defendants' January 7, 2013 motion to vacate or modify. Defendants' filing re: Plata motion to terminate due 02/12/13. Plaintiffs' show cause response and opposition to motion to vacate or modify due 02/12/13. Defe ndants' reply due 02/19/13. 2374 June 30, 2011 Order is modified by extending the deadline for final population reduction benchmark to 12/31/13. Signed by Judges Stephen Reinhardt, Lawrence K. Karlton, and Thelton E. Henderson on 01/29/2013.(tehlc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/29/2013)

1
2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTS

3

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

4

AND THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT COMPOSED OF THREE JUDGES

6

PURSUANT TO SECTION 2284, TITLE 28 UNITED STATES CODE

7
8

RALPH COLEMAN, et al.,

9

Plaintiffs,
NO. CIV S-90-0520 LKK JFM P

10

v.

11

EDMUND G. BROWN JR., et al.,

12

Defendants.

THREE-JUDGE COURT

13
14

MARCIANO PLATA, et al.,
NO. C01-1351 TEH
Plaintiffs,

15

THREE-JUDGE COURT

16

v.

17

EDMUND G. BROWN JR., et al.,

18

Defendants.

ORDER RE: DEFENDANTS’
JANUARY 7, 2013 MOTION TO
VACATE OR MODIFY

19
20

On January 7, 2013, defendants filed in this Court a motion to vacate or modify

21 (“Three-Judge Motion”) our June 30, 2011 Order requiring defendants to achieve a prison
22 population of 137.5% design capacity by June 27, 2013. Concurrently, defendants filed a
23 motion to terminate prospective relief in the Coleman v. Brown litigation (“Coleman
24 Motion”). Defendants did not, however, file a similar motion in the Plata v. Brown
25 litigation. Plaintiffs have not yet filed a response to the Three-Judge Motion, even though –
26 under our April 25, 2008 Order – a response was due on January 22, 2013.
27

One of defendants’ principal contentions in the Three-Judge Motion is that there are

28 no ongoing systemwide constitutional violations in medical and mental health care.

1 Defendants also make this argument with respect to mental health care to the Coleman court
2 in the Coleman Motion. Defendants have not, however, made a similar argument with
3 respect to medical care to the Plata court and have not formally advised this Court whether
4 they intend to do so in the near future. It would be a waste of judicial resources for this
5 Court to begin to determine any issue until it is made aware of defendants’ filing plans
6 regarding the constitutional question. Accordingly, this Court directs defendants to answer
7 the following questions:
8

1.

9

contending that there are no longer ongoing systemwide constitutional

10
11

Do defendants intend to file a motion to terminate in the Plata litigation,

violations with respect to medical care?
2.

If so, when do defendants intend to file such a motion?

12 Defendants must respond within 14 days of the filing of this order. Pending further order of
13 this Court, our consideration of the Three-Judge Motion is STAYED.
14

Notwithstanding this stay, this Court directs plaintiffs to file a response to the Three-

15 Judge Motion within 14 days of the filing of this order. Plaintiffs should include declarations
16 to respond to the contentions made by defendants. Plaintiffs shall also show good cause for
17 their failure to file a response by the January 22, 2013 deadline. Defendants shall file a reply
18 to plaintiffs’ response within 21 days of the filing of this order.
19

This Court’s June 30, 2011 Order remains in effect pending our determination of these

20 issues, and defendants are reminded of their obligation to continue to comply with its terms
21 and provisions. Neither defendants’ filings of the papers filed thus far nor any motions,
22 declarations, affidavits, or other papers filed subsequently shall serve as a justification for
23 their failure to file and report or take any other actions required by this Court’s Order.
24 Defendants have advised us, however, that they are unable to meet the 137.5% prisoner
25 population cap by June 2013 but that they will be able to do so essentially by December 31,
26 2013. Accordingly, this Court modifies the June 30, 2011 Order by GRANTING defendants
27 a six-month extension in which to comply with its terms and provisions. Defendants are now
28 //
2

1 required to achieve the 137.5% prisoner population cap by December 31, 2013. Defendants
2 shall take all steps necessary to comply with the Order as amended.
3
4 IT IS SO ORDERED.
5
6 Dated: 01/29/13
7

STEPHEN REINHARDT
UNITED STATES CIRCUIT JUDGE
NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS

8
9
10 Dated: 01/29/13
11

LAWRENCE K. KARLTON
SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

12
13
14 Dated: 01/29/13
15

THELTON E. HENDERSON
SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3