(PC) Gradford v. Freddie

Opinion

WILLIAM J. GRADFORD, Case No. 1:19-cv-01252-DAD-EPG (PC)

Plaintiff, ORDER REQUIRING PARTIES TO EXCHANGE DOCUMENTS v.

Defendant(s). William J. Gradford (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On December 14, 2020, the Court issued an order requiring the parties to file scheduling conference statements. (ECF No. 34.) The parties have now filed their statements. (ECF Nos. 36, 38.) The Court has reviewed this case and the parties’ statements. In an effort to secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive disposition of this action,1 the Court will direct that certain documents that are central to the dispute be promptly produced.2 1 See, e.g., United States v. W.R. Grace, 526 F.3d 499, 508–09 (9th Cir. 2008) (“We begin with the principle that the district court is charged with effectuating the speedy and orderly administration of justice. There is universal acceptance in the federal courts that, in carrying out this mandate, a district court has the authority to enter pretrial case management and discovery orders designed to ensure that the relevant issues to be tried are identified, that the parties have an opportunity to engage in appropriate discovery and that the parties are adequately and timely prepared so that the trial can proceed efficiently and intelligibly.”). 2 Advisory Committee Notes to 1993 Amendment to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure regarding Rule 26(a) (“The enumeration in Rule 26(a) of items to be disclosed does not prevent a court from requiring by order or local rule that the parties disclose additional information without a discovery request.”). een nnn nn nnn nn EI IIE EE IIE GOS) IESE

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that: 1. Each party has sixty days from the date of service of this order to serve opposing parties, or their counsel, if represented, with copies of the following documents and/or evidence that they have in their possession, custody, or control, to the extent the parties have not already done so:* a. Any documents related to Plaintiff's grievances stemming from the events at issue in the complaint, including copies of the grievances and any responses from Plaintiff's institution of confinement. 2. Parties do not need to produce documents they have already produced or documents that were provided to them by the opposing party. 3. Parties may object to producing any of the above-listed documents and/or evidence. Objections shall be filed with the Court and served on all other parties within sixty days from the date of service of this order (or within thirty days of receiving additional documents and/or evidence). The objection should include the basis for not providing the documents and/or evidence. If Defendant(s) object based on the official information privilege, Defendant(s) shall follow the procedures described in the Court’s scheduling order. Ifa party files an objection, all other parties have fourteen days from the date the objection is filed to file a response. If any party files a response to an objection, the Court will issue a ruling on the objection. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: _ March 1, 2021 [see heey — UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 3 Defense counsel is requested to obtain these documents from Plaintiff's institution(s) of confinement. If ! defense counsel is unable to do so, defense counsel should inform Plaintiff that a third party subpoena is required.