(PC) Coleman v. Newsom

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA RALPH COLEMAN, et al., No. 2:90-cv-0520 KJM SCR P 12 Plaintiffs, 13 v. ORDER GAVIN NEWSOM, et al., 15 Defendants.

17 Plaintiffs are a class of prisoners proceeding through counsel in this action now in the remedial phase. The court has referred several matters to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

20 On March 25, 2025, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within five days. Neither party has filed objections to the findings and recommendations.

24 The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law by the magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court . . . .”).

1 Having reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the proper analysis. The court acknowledges and shares the concerns raised by the magistrate judge about the proper use of telemental health in a prison setting and how the modification to the definition of on-site work to include part-time remote work, reflected in the Hybrid Work Policy, may impact implementation of the Unified Policy.

6 See March 25, 2025 Findings and Recommendations, ECF No. 8580, at 12-13. The court expects the Special Master will report on these matters in his monitoring reports going forward and that recommendations for any necessary amendments will be brought promptly to the court’s attention.

10 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 11 1. The findings and recommendations filed March 25, 2025, are adopted in full; 12 2. The court APPROVES the Unified Policy attached as Exhibit A to this order; 13 3. Defendants shall implement the Unified Policy forthwith; and 14 4. This court will independently evaluate whether to approve the Hybrid Work Policy agreed to by the parties once the stay imposed by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is lifted.

17 DATED: April 4, 2025.