Barnett v. Norman, et al.
Filing
106
ORDER Denying Plaintiff's 80 Motion to Seal Photographs signed by Magistrate Judge Gerald B. Cohn on 06/24/2011. (Flores, E)
<![CDATA[
1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
TROAS V. BARNETT,
10
11
CASE NO. 1:05-cv-01022-GBC (PC)
Plaintiff,
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF”S MOTION
TO SEAL PHOTOGRAPHS
v.
(Doc. 80)
12
13
DAVID NORMAN, et al.,
Defendants.
/
14
15
Plaintiff Troas V. Barnett (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma
16
pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed the complaint
17
commencing this action on August 9, 2005. (Doc. 1.) This action now proceeds under the Third
18
Amended Complaint, filed on October 30, 2008, against Defendants Martin Gamboa, Angel Duran
19
and Manuel Torres (“Defendants”) for events that occurred at California Substance Abuse Treatment
20
Facility, Corcoran. (Doc. 48). Plaintiff is currently housed at Kern Valley State Prison. On July 20,
21
2010, the Court issued a Discovery/Scheduling Order establishing a deadline of March 20, 2011, for
22
completion of discovery, including motions to compel, and a deadline of May 31, 2011, for filing
23
pretrial dispositive motions. (Docs. 59, 77). On November 12, 2010, Plaintiff filed a motion to file
24
his photographic evidence under seal in fear that the Defendants may confiscate or destroy his
25
photographic evidence. (Docs. 80, 81). In response to a Court order, Defendants filed an opposition
26
on June 9, 2011. (Doc. 101). Plaintiff did not file a reply.
27
Plaintiff’s request falls under Rule 26(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Plaintiff
28
has failed to demonstrate how the information that Defendants request is protected by some form of
1
1
privilege that should or should otherwise be shielded from public view or from Defendants.
2
Plaintiff’s fear that counsel for Defendants would destroy Plaintiff’s evidence is unfounded and thus
3
is an insufficient ground to support his motion. As it appears that Plaintiff is attempting to withhold
4
properly discoverable evidence from the Defendants, Plaintiff is warned that for trial, Plaintiff will
5
not be allowed to use any evidence that was properly requested during discovery that Plaintiff has
6
refused to provide to Defendants. Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(c)(1).
7
Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff’s motion to file records under seal is DENIED. (Doc. 80).
8
9
IT IS SO ORDERED.
10
11
Dated:
0jh02o
June 24, 2011
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
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?
