1

2

3

4

5

6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8

9 ROBERT SIMS, Case No. 1:24-cv-00433-KES-EPG (PC)

10 Plaintiff,

11 v. ORDER REQUIRING PARTIES TO EXCHANGE DOCUMENTS 12 SARA V. CENTENO, et al., 13 Defendant. 14 15 Plaintiff Robert Sims is a civil detainee and is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis 16 in this civil rights action filed pursuant to

. 17 The Court issued an order requiring the parties to file scheduling and discovery 18 statements, and the parties have now filed their statements. (ECF Nos. 23, 24). 19 The Court has reviewed this case and the parties’ statements. In an effort to secure the 20 just, speedy, and inexpensive disposition of this action,1 the Court will direct that certain 21 documents that are central to the dispute be promptly produced.2

22 1 See, e.g., United States v. W.R. Grace,

, 508–09 (9th Cir. 2008) (“We begin with 23 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 24 court has the authority to enter pretrial case management and discovery orders designed to ensure that 25 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 26 and intelligibly.”). 2 Advisory Committee Notes to 1993 Amendment to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure regarding 27 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 28 request.”). 1 1 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that: 2 1. Each party has sixty days from the date of service of this order to serve opposing 3 parties, or their counsel, if represented, with copies of the following documents 4 and/or evidence that they have in their possession, custody, or control, to the 5 extent the parties have not already done so.3 This order applies to all documents 6 including confidential documents. Moreover, the parties are required to produce 7 these documents, or lodge objections as described below, without awaiting a 8 discovery request. 9 a. Witness statements and evidence that were generated from 10 investigation(s) related to the event(s) at issue in the complaint, such as 11 an investigation stemming from the processing of Plaintiff’s 12 grievance(s).4 13 b. Incident investigation reports and logs regarding incident(s) alleged in 14 the complaint. 15 c. All of Plaintiff’s medical records related to the incident(s) and/or 16 condition(s) at issue in the case. 17 18 19 20 21 22 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 23 party subpoena is required. 4 See Woodford v. Ngo,

, 94–95 (2006) (“[P]roper exhaustion improves the quality 24 of those prisoner suits that are eventually filed because proper exhaustion often results in the creation of 25 an administrative record that is helpful to the court. When a grievance is filed shortly after the event giving rise to the grievance, witnesses can be identified and questioned while memories are still fresh, 26 and evidence can be gathered and preserved.”). The Court notes that Defendant(s) only need to produce documents such as a Confidential 27 Appeal Inquiry or a Use of Force Critique to the extent those documents contain witness statements related to the incident(s) alleged in the complaint and/or evidence related to the incident(s) alleged in the 28 complaint that will not be provided to Plaintiff separately. 2 1 d. Video recordings and photographs related to the incident(s) at issue in 2 the complaint, including video recordings and photographs of Plaintiff 3 taken following the incident(s).5 4 e. A copy of all documents, electronically stored information, and tangible 5 things that the disclosing party has in its possession, custody, or control 6 and may use to support its claims or defenses, unless the use would be 7 solely for impeachment. 8 2. If any party obtains documents and/or other evidence described above later in 9 the case (including, but not limited to, documents and/or other evidence from a 10 third party), that party shall provide all other parties with copies of the 11 documents and/or evidence within thirty days. The failure of a party to comply 12 with this requirement may result, among other things, in the party not being able 13 to rely on the pertinent information later in the case. 14 3. Parties do not need to produce documents or evidence that they have already 15 produced. 16 4. Parties do not need to produce documents or evidence that were provided to 17 them by the opposing party. 18 5. Parties may object to producing any of the above-listed documents and/or 19 evidence. Objections shall be filed with the Court and served on all other parties 20 within sixty days from the date of service of this order (or within thirty days of 21 receiving additional documents and/or evidence). The objection should include 22 the basis for not providing the documents and/or evidence. If Defendant objects 23 based on the official information privilege, Defendant shall follow the 24 procedures described in the Court’s scheduling order. If a party files an 25 objection, all other parties have fourteen days from the date the objection is filed 26 27 5 If Plaintiff is not allowed possess, or is unable to play, video recording(s), defense counsel shall work with staff at Plaintiff’s institution of confinement to ensure that Plaintiff is able to view the 28 video recording(s). 3 1 to file a response. If any party files a response to an objection, the Court will 2 issue a ruling on the objection. 3 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. >|! Dated: _December 10, 2024 □□□ ey —— 6 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28