(PC) Perry v. United States Penitentiary Atwater

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA GARETH PERRY, Case No. 1:20-cv-00279-SKO (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S 13 v. MOTION FOR MISCELLANEOUS RELIEF UNITED STATES PENITENTIARY, ATWATER, (Doc. 16) Defendant.

17 Plaintiff Gareth Perry is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action brought pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). Plaintiff moves the Court to mark all mail it sends to Plaintiff as “private” or, in the alternative, issue an order that prison staff be required to open mail from the Court in front of Plaintiff. (See Doc. 16 at 1-2.)

22 As explained in the Court’s first screening order (Doc. 14), court records are generally open to the public, with the exception of documents filed under seal or pursuant to a protective order. See, e.g., Phillips ex rel. Estates of Byrd v. Gen. Motors Corp., 307 F.3d 1206, 1212-13 (9th Cir. 2002). “The public” includes prison staff. In addition, as also explained in the screening order, prison officials may generally inspect mail from the courts outside of inmates’ presence.

27 See Hayes v. Idaho Corr. Ctr., 849 F.3d 1204, 1211 (9th Cir. 2017). “Mail from the courts, as Amendment does not prohibit opening such mail outside the recipient’s presence.” Id. (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).

3 For the above reasons, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s motion.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Sheila K. Oberto Dated: January 11, 2021 /s/ .

7 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE