Anderson v. Richards et al
Filing
35
ORDER denying without prejudice Interested Party Washington Department of Corrections' 32 Motion to Stay Court's Order, signed by Hon. Brian A Tsuchida. **2 PAGE(S), PRINT ALL**(Sean Anderson, Prisoner ID: 957450)(SWT)
1
2
3
4
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE
6
7
8
SEAN D. ANDERSON,
Plaintiff,
9
10
11
12
13
v.
ALLEN K. RICHARDS, et. al.,
CASE NO. C17-58 RSL-BAT
ORDER ON DOC’S REQUEST TO
STAY MAKING VIDEO C.D.’S
AVAILABLE TO INCARCERATED
PLAINTIFF
Defendants.
On September 6, 2017, the Court granted defendants’ motion for order to make 41 video
14
CD’s labeled ANDER000218 through ANDER000258 available to Mr. Anderson, an inmate at
15
Coyote Ridge Corrections Center. Dkt. 26. On October 4, 2017, non-party the Department of
16
Corrections (“DOC”) moved to stay the Court’s order. Dkt. 32. DOC contends it is unduly
17
burdensome to make the 41 CD’s available to Mr. Anderson, and it is DOC’s “understanding
18
that Defendants intend to greatly decrease the amount of footage it intends to provide the Court.”
19
Dkt. 32 at 1. As relief, DOC asks the Court to stay its order to:
20
21
22
23
provide the parties with the opportunity to try to limit the amount
of items Anderson may need to review. If the parties cannot come
to an agreement, the Department may move to strike or limit the
Court’s current order.
Id. at 2-3. Neither Mr. Anderson nor Defendants have responded to DOC’s motion, which is
noted today for the Court’s consideration.
ORDER ON DOC’S REQUEST TO STAY MAKING
VIDEO C.D.’S AVAILABLE TO INCARCERATED
PLAINTIFF - 1
1
The Court understands how making the 41 CD’s available to Mr. Anderson may be
2
burdensome, but cannot grant the motion as presented because it is too open-ended. Accordingly
3
the Court ORDERS:
4
5
6
7
1. Defendants and Plaintiff shall confer to determine whether all 41 CDs contain
relevant information about this case, or not. Defendant shall file a joint statement
stating whether the number of CDs can be reduced, or not. If they can, Defendants
shall resubmit to DOC, as soon as practicable, the pared down set of CDs for Mr.
Anderson’s viewing. The parties’ joint statement shall also indicate whether the
provision of the CDs will cause delay and the need to reset the discovery and other
deadlines previously set in this case. The parties’ joint statement shall be filed by
November 3, 2017.
8
9
2. If a pared down set of CDs is submitted, Coyote Ridge Corrections Center is to make
this new set of CDs available to Mr. Anderson for viewing at the appropriate time and
place of Coyote Ridge Correction Center’s choosing.
10
11
12
13
14
3. In the event the parties believe all 41 CDs must be made available to Mr. Anderson,
the parties shall file supporting memos explaining why this is so, i.e., why the CDs
are material and relevant to the case. Defendants shall file a memo by November 9,
2017. Mr. Anderson’s memo is due November 16, 2017. Any opposition by DOC to
the parties’ contention that all 41 CDs be provided shall be filed by November 22,
2017.
17
4. The Court DENIES DOC’s blanket motion, Dkt. 32, for a stay of the Court’s order,
Dkt. 26, without prejudice. DOC does not contend Mr. Anderson should be denied
access to all CDs. There is thus no reason DOC has not begun to make the CDs
available. The Court also notes it appears the burdens DOC faces may be addressed
by time. Six weeks have passed since the Court ordered DOC to make the CDs
available. The Court assumes Mr. Anderson has viewed some of the CDs since then,
and that he continues to have the opportunity to view them.
18
5. The Clerk shall provide a copy of this order to all parties and DOC.
19
DATED this 20th day of October, 2017.
15
16
20
A
21
BRIAN A. TSUCHIDA
United States Magistrate Judge
22
23
ORDER ON DOC’S REQUEST TO STAY MAKING
VIDEO C.D.’S AVAILABLE TO INCARCERATED
PLAINTIFF - 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?