Case 1:15-cv-01650-JAM-SAB Document 1 Filed 10/29/15 Page 1 of 11

[2817052-11]

1 LISA ELLS – 243657 CHRISTOPHER D, HU – 293052
2 ROSEN BIEN GALVAN & GRUNFELD LLP 50 Fremont Street, 19th Floor
3 San Francisco, California 94105-2235 Telephone: (415) 433-6830
4 Facsimile: (415) 433-7104

5 LANCE WEBER – Fla. Bar No. 104550*

SABARISH NEELAKANTA – Fla. Bar No. 26623*

6 HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENSE CENTER

P.O. Box 1151

7 Lake Worth, Florida 33460

Telephone: (561) 360-2523

8 Facsimile: (866) 735-7136

Email:

lweber@humanrightsdefensecenter.org

9

sneelakanta@humanrightsdefensecenter.org

10 * Pro Hac Vice Applications To Be Filed

11 Attorneys for Plaintiff

12

13

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

14

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

15

16 PRISON LEGAL NEWS, a project of the HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENSE CENTER,
17 Plaintiff,
18 v.
19 COUNTY OF TULARE; MIKE
20 BOUDREAUX, individually and in his capacity as Sheriff–Coroner of the County
21 of Tulare; DOES 1-20, in their individual and official capacities,
22 Defendants.
23

Case No.
COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF UNDER THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 AND DAMAGES
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

24

25

26

27

28

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF UNDER THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 AND DAMAGES

Case 1:15-cv-01650-JAM-SAB Document 1 Filed 10/29/15 Page 2 of 11

[2817052-11]

1

INTRODUCTION

2

Plaintiff, PRISON LEGAL NEWS (“PLN”), a project of the Human Rights Defense

3 Center, brings this action against Defendants to enjoin them from censoring its monthly

4 journal, Prison Legal News, mailed to prisoners at the Bob Wiley Detention Facility (“the

5 Jail” herein). Defendants have adopted and implemented mail policies prohibiting delivery

6 of mail from Plaintiff and other senders, failing to provide due process notice and an

7 opportunity to challenge the censorship, and denying senders equal protection as required

8 by the United States Constitution. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants’ actions violate its

9 rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, and

10 seeks injunctive and declaratory relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff also seeks

11 damages in an amount to be proven at trial.

12

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

13

1. This action is brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (federal question), as

14 this action arises under the Constitution and laws of the United States, and pursuant to 28

15 U.S.C. § 1343 (civil rights), as this action seeks redress for civil rights violations under 42

16 U.S.C. § 1983.

17

2. This action is brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (federal question), as

18 this action arises under the Constitution and laws of the United States, and pursuant to 28

19 U.S.C. § 1343 (civil rights), as this action seeks redress for civil rights violations under 42

20 U.S.C. § 1983.

21

3. Venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b). At least one Defendant resides

22 within this judicial district, and the events giving rise to the claims asserted herein all

23 occurred within this judicial district.

24

4. Plaintiff’s claims for relief are predicated upon 42 U.S.C. § 1983, which

25 authorizes actions to redress the deprivation, under color of state law, of rights, privileges

26 and immunities secured to the Plaintiff by the First, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments to

27 the U.S. Constitution and the laws of the United States.

28

5. This Court has jurisdiction over claims seeking declaratory and injunctive

1
COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF UNDER THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 AND DAMAGES

Case 1:15-cv-01650-JAM-SAB Document 1 Filed 10/29/15 Page 3 of 11

[2817052-11]

1 relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 and 2202, and Rules 57 and 65 of the Federal Rules of

2 Civil Procedure, as well as nominal and compensatory damages, against all Defendants.

3

6. Plaintiff’s claim for attorneys’ fees and costs is predicated upon 42 U.S.C. §

4 1988, which authorizes the award of attorneys’ fees and costs to prevailing plaintiffs in

5 actions brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

6

7. Plaintiff is informed, believes, and based thereon alleges that the individual

7 Defendants acted as described herein with reckless disregard for Plaintiff’s rights and/or

8 with the intent to injure, vex, annoy and harass Plaintiff, and subjected Plaintiff to cruel

9 and unjust hardship in conscious disregard of Plaintiff’s rights with the intention of

10 causing Plaintiff injury and depriving it of its constitutional rights.

11

8. As a result of the foregoing, Plaintiff seeks compensatory and punitive

12 damages against the individual Defendants.

13

PARTIES

14

9. Plaintiff PRISON LEGAL NEWS is a project of the Human Rights Defense

15 Center, a Washington non-profit corporation. PLN publishes a 72-page monthly journal of

16 corrections news and analysis called Prison Legal News, and distributes books about the

17 criminal justice system and legal issues affecting prisoners to prisoners, lawyers, courts,

18 libraries, and the public throughout the country.

19

10. Defendant COUNTY OF TULARE is a municipal corporation formed under

20 the laws of the State of California.

21

11. Defendant MIKE BOUDREAUX is the Sheriff-Coroner of the County of

22 Tulare. Sheriff Boudreaux is employed by and is an agent of Tulare County and the Tulare

23 County Sheriff’s Department. Defendant Boudreaux is responsible for the operations of

24 the Bob Wiley Detention Facility, and has ultimate responsibility for the promulgation and

25 enforcement of all Jail staff policies and procedures, and the training and supervision of

26 the jail staff who interpret and implement the county’s mail policy for U.S. Mail delivered

27 to and from prisoners at the Jail. He is the policymaker of the jail’s policy governing mail

28 for prisoners. He is sued in his individual and official capacities.
2
COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF UNDER THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 AND DAMAGES

Case 1:15-cv-01650-JAM-SAB Document 1 Filed 10/29/15 Page 4 of 11

[2817052-11]

1

12. The true names and identities of Defendants DOES 1 through 10 are

2 presently unknown to PLN. Each of Defendants DOES 1 through 10 are or were

3 employed by and are or were agents of Defendants when some or all of the challenged

4 inmate mail policies and practices were adopted and/or implemented. Each of Defendants

5 DOES 1 through 10 were personally involved in the adoption and/or implementation of the

6 mail policies at the Jail, and/or were responsible for the hiring, screening, training,

7 retention, supervision, discipline, counseling, and/or control of Jail staff who interpret and

8 implement these mail policies. PLN will seek to amend this Complaint as soon as the true

9 names and identities of Defendants DOES 1 through 10 have been ascertained.

10

13. At all times material to this action, the actions of all Defendants as alleged

11 herein were taken under the authority and color of state law.

12

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

13

14. Prison Legal News (“PLN”) publishes Prison Legal News: Dedicated to

14 Protecting Human Rights, a monthly journal of corrections news and analysis regarding

15 prisoners’ rights, court rulings, management of prison and jail facilities and conditions of

16 confinement. PLN also distributes books about the criminal justice system and legal issues

17 affecting prisoners.

18

15. PLN has thousands of subscribers in the United States and abroad, including

19 prisoners, attorneys, journalists, public libraries, judges, and members of the general

20 public. PLN distributes its monthly publication to prisoners and law librarians in more

21 than 2,600 correctional facilities located across all fifty states, including the Federal

22 Bureau of Prisons and the California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation.

23

16. PLN also distributes approximately fifty (50) different books about the

24 criminal justice system, legal reference books, and self-help books of interest to prisoners.

25 These books are designed to foster a better understanding of criminal justice policies and

26 to allow prisoners to educate themselves about related issues, such as legal research, how

27 to write a business letter, health care issues, and similar topics.

28

17. Plaintiff’s organizational purpose, as stated in its Articles of Incorporation, is

3
COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF UNDER THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 AND DAMAGES

Case 1:15-cv-01650-JAM-SAB Document 1 Filed 10/29/15 Page 5 of 11

[2817052-11]

1 to disseminate legal information on issues affecting prisoners and their loved ones on the

2 outside and to educate prisoners and the public about the destructive nature of racism,

3 sexism, and the economic and social costs of prisons to society, among other purposes.

4

18. PLN engages in core protected speech and expressive conduct on matters of

5 public concern, such as the operation of prison facilities, prison conditions, prisoner health

6 and safety, and prisoners’ rights. Plaintiff’s monthly journal, as described above, contains

7 political speech and social commentary, which are at the core of First Amendment values

8 and are entitled to the highest protection afforded by the U.S. Constitution. For more than

9 25 years, the core of PLN’s mission has been public education, advocacy and outreach on

10 behalf of, and for the purpose of assisting, prisoners who seek legal redress for

11 infringements of their constitutionally guaranteed and other basic human rights. PLN’s

12 mission, if realized, has a salutary effect on public safety.

13

19. From September 2013 to present, PLN has sent at least three hundred and

14 thirty-six (336) issues of Prison Legal News to prisoners at the Jail. On information and

15 belief, each month the following number of individually addressed issues of Prison Legal

16 News were not delivered to intended recipients incarcerated at the Jail at the time it arrived

17 in the mail:

18

Number

19

of Issues

Item

Date Mailed Censored

20

Prison Legal News September 2013 11

21

Prison Legal News October 2013

19

22

Prison Legal News November 2013 11

23

Prison Legal News December 2013 10

Prison Legal News January 2014

12

24

Prison Legal News February 2014

17

25

Prison Legal News March 2014

4

26

Prison Legal News April 2014

11

Prison Legal News May 2014

8

27

Prison Legal News June 2014

12

28

Prison Legal News July 2014

6

4
COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF UNDER THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 AND DAMAGES

Case 1:15-cv-01650-JAM-SAB Document 1 Filed 10/29/15 Page 6 of 11

[2817052-11]

1

Number

of Issues

2

Item

Date Mailed Censored

3

Prison Legal News August 2014

18

Prison Legal News September 2014 8

4

Prison Legal News October 2014

3

5

Prison Legal News November 2014

6

6

Prison Legal News December 2014

7

7

Prison Legal News January 2015

12

Prison Legal News February 2015

6

8

Prison Legal News March 2015

13

9

Prison Legal News April 2015

25

10

Prison Legal News May 2015

25

Prison Legal News June 2015

22

11

Prison Legal News July 2015

20

12

Prison Legal News August 2015

20

13

Prison Legal News September 2015 20

Prison Legal News October 2015

20

14

15

20. In some instances, Defendants returned the issues of Prison Legal News to

16 Plaintiff’s office via the Return To Sender (“RTS”) service of the United States Postal

17 Service. Defendants marked the outside of the returned issues with an ink stamp that

18 contained the words “RETURN TO SENDER” in large sized letters across the top. This

19 stamp also contained six short explanations in smaller sized letters directly underneath,

20 which read as follows:

21

__ Unauthorized Mail

__ Need inmate I.D. #

22

__ Not in custody

__ No Money Orders

23

__ Unable to read name

__ I/M with same name

24

21. None of the above noted reasons were checked or otherwise marked as the

25 reason for the censorship.

26

22. Defendants did not provide Plaintiff with any notice of this censorship nor

27 did they provide any opportunity to appeal the censorship decisions.

28

23. Plaintiff learned from some of PLN’s subscribers that jail staff claimed that

5
COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF UNDER THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 AND DAMAGES

Case 1:15-cv-01650-JAM-SAB Document 1 Filed 10/29/15 Page 7 of 11

[2817052-11]

1 they were not delivering Prison Legal News due to the fact that it is bound with two wire

2 staples.

3

24. Despite censoring Plaintiff’s monthly journal purportedly because of staples,

4 Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendants have allowed other publications

5 containing staples to be delivered to prisoners.

6

25. Specifically, Defendants allow a publication entitled “Our Daily Bread,”

7 which contains Christian content, but is also bound with staples, to be delivered to inmates

8 in the Jail. Defendants’ refusal to deliver Prison Legal News, a secular publication,

9 because it is bound with staples, while delivering a Christian publication bound with

10 staples to inmates in the Jail, violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment of

11 the United States Constitution. Additionally, by treating Plaintiff differently than other

12 similarly situated publishers and distributors, Defendants violate Plaintiffs’ right to equal

13 protection under the law.

14

26. On information and belief, Defendants have also refused to deliver secular

15 publications other than Prison Legal News on the basis that they were bound with staples.

16

27. Not only do Defendants allow delivery of Christian publications bound with

17 wire staples, on information and belief, Defendants themselves provide their detainees

18 with similar staples in several other ways in the common course of business within the Jail.

19

28. PLN will continue to mail copies of Prison Legal News to subscribers

20 imprisoned at the Jail.

21

29. The accommodation of the free speech, expression, equal protection and due

22 process rights of Plaintiff with respect to written speech protected by the Constitution will

23 not have any significant impact on the prison, its staff or prisoners.

24

30. Due to Defendants’ actions as described above, Plaintiff has suffered

25 damages, and will continue to suffer damages, including, but not limited to: the

26 suppression of Plaintiff’s speech; the impediment of Plaintiff’s ability to disseminate its

27 political message; frustration of Plaintiff’s non-profit organizational mission; the loss of

28 potential subscribers and customers; and the inability to recruit new subscribers and
6
COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF UNDER THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 AND DAMAGES

Case 1:15-cv-01650-JAM-SAB Document 1 Filed 10/29/15 Page 8 of 11

[2817052-11]

1 supporters, among other damages.

2

31. Defendants’ actions and inactions were and are motivated by ill motive and

3 intent, and were and are all committed under color of law with reckless indifference to

4 PLN’s rights and/or with evil motive or an intent to vex Plaintiff.

5

32. Defendants, and other agents of the Jail, are responsible for or personally

6 participated in creating and implementing these unconstitutional policies, practices, and

7 customs, or for ratifying or adopting them. Further, Defendants are responsible for training

8 and supervising the staff persons whose conduct has injured and continues to injure PLN.

9

33. Defendants’ unconstitutional policy, practices, and customs are ongoing,

10 continue to violate PLN’s rights, and were and are the moving force behind the injuries

11 Plaintiff suffered as a direct result of the constitutional violations. As such, PLN has no

12 adequate remedy at law.

13

34. PLN is entitled to declaratory relief as well as injunctive relief prohibiting

14 Defendants from refusing to deliver publications and correspondence from plaintiff and

15 other senders without any legal justification, and prohibiting Defendants from censoring

16 mail without due process of law.

17

CLAIMS FOR RELIEF

18

FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF

(For Violations of the First Amendment Under Color Of State Law – Free Speech;

19

Section 1983)

20

35. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs.

21

36. The acts described above constitute violations of Plaintiff’s rights under the

22 First Amendment to the United States Constitution and have caused damages to Plaintiff,

23 and will continue to cause damage.

24

37. Plaintiff seeks declaratory and injunctive relief and nominal and

25 compensatory damages against all Defendants. Plaintiff also seeks punitive damages

26 solely against the individual Defendants.

27

28
7
COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF UNDER THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 AND DAMAGES

Case 1:15-cv-01650-JAM-SAB Document 1 Filed 10/29/15 Page 9 of 11

[2817052-11]

1

SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF

((For Violations of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment Under

2

Color Of State Law; Section 1983))

3

38. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs.

4

39. By failing to give Plaintiff sufficient notice of the censorship of its

5 publications, and an opportunity to be heard with respect to that censorship, Defendants

6 have deprived and continue to deprive Plaintiff of liberty and property without due process

7 of law, in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution

8 through 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

9

40. The acts described above have caused damage to Plaintiff, and will continue

10 to cause damage.

11

41. Plaintiff seeks declaratory and injunctive relief and nominal and

12 compensatory damages against all Defendants. Plaintiff also seeks punitive damages

13 solely against the individual Defendants.

14

THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF

(For Violations of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment Under

15

Color Of State Law; Section 1983)

16

42. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs.

17

43. By prohibiting the delivery of Plaintiff’s publications but allowing the

18 delivery of the publications of others who are similarly situated, Defendants have deprived

19 and continue to deprive Plaintiff of equal protection under the laws, in violation of the

20 Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution through 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

21

44. Plaintiff seeks declaratory and injunctive relief and nominal and

22 compensatory damages against all Defendants. Plaintiff also seeks punitive damages

23 solely against the individual Defendants.

24

FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

(For Violations of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment Under Color of

25

State Law; Section 1983)

26

45. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs.

27

46. By prohibiting the delivery of Plaintiff’s publications because they are bound

28 with staples, but allowing the delivery of a Christian publication bound with staples,
8
COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF UNDER THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 AND DAMAGES

Case 1:15-cv-01650-JAM-SAB Document 1 Filed 10/29/15 Page 10 of 11

[2817052-11]

1 Defendants have violated Plaintiff’s rights under the Establishment Clause of the First

2 Amendment to the United States Constitution and the Fourteenth Amendment to the

3 United States Constitution through 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

4

47. Defendants’ practices unconstitutionally favor religion over non-religion,

5 and specifically Christian content over secular content, and therefore have the primary

6 purpose and effect of promoting religion and Christianity.

7

48. Defendants’ practices also improperly endorse religion, specifically

8 Christianity.

9

49. Plaintiff seeks declaratory and injunctive relief and nominal and

10 compensatory damages against all Defendants. Plaintiff also seeks punitive damages

11 solely against the individual Defendants.

12

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

13

The conduct previously alleged, unless and until enjoined by order of this Court,

14 will cause continuing, irreparable injury to Plaintiff. Further, a judicial declaration is

15 necessary and appropriate at this time so that all parties may know their respective rights

16 and act accordingly.

17

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests relief as follows:

18

1. A declaration that Defendants’ policies, practices, and customs excluding

19 certain publications on the grounds that they are bound with staples and of failing to

20 provide due process to senders of censored mail violate the First and Fourteenth

21 Amendments to the United States Constitution.

22

2. An order enjoining all Defendants and their employees, agents, and any and

23 all persons acting in concert with them who have actual knowledge of this order from

24 further violation of Plaintiff’s civil rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to

25 the United States Constitution.

26

3. Nominal damages for each violation by the Defendants against the Plaintiff’s

27 rights.

28

4. Compensatory damages in an amount to be proven at trial.

9
COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF UNDER THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 AND DAMAGES

Case 1:15-cv-01650-JAM-SAB Document 1 Filed 10/29/15 Page 11 of 11

[2817052-11]

1

5. Punitive damages against the individual defendants in an amount to be

2 proven at trial.

3

6. Costs, including reasonable attorney’s fees, under 42 U.S.C. § 1988, and

4 under other applicable law.

5

7. Prejudgment and post judgment interest.

6

8. Such other relief as the Court deems just and equitable.

7

8 DATED: October 29, 2015

Respectfully submitted,

9

ROSEN BIEN GALVAN & GRUNFELD LLP

10

By: /s/ Lisa Ells

11

Lisa Ells

12

Attorneys for Plaintiff

13

14

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

15

Plaintiff hereby demands a jury trial.

16

17 DATED: October 29, 2015

Respectfully submitted,

18

ROSEN BIEN GALVAN & GRUNFELD LLP

19 By: /s/ Lisa Ells

20

Lisa Ells

21

Attorneys for Plaintiff

22

23

24

25

26

27

28
10
COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF UNDER THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 AND DAMAGES

 
 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

11 PRISON LEGAL NEWS, a project the HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENSE
12 CENTER,

No. 1:15-cv-01650 JAM-SAB

13

Plaintiff,

14

v.

ORDER DENYING IN PART AND GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PRELMINARY INJUNCTION

15 COUNTY OF TULARE; MIKE

BOUDREAUX, individually and

16

his capacity as Sherif

Coroner of the County of

17

; DOES 1-20, in their

individual and official

18 capacities,

19

Defendants.

20

21

On December 16, 2015 at 9:30a.m., this matter came on

22

ly for a hearing in Courtroom 6, Fourteenth Floor, of this

23 Court, the Honorable John A. Mendez presiding. Having considered

24 the parties' pleadings, the arguments of counsel, and the entire

25

in this case, and good cause

ing therefor,

26

THE COURT HEREBY FINDS AND

27

Plaintiff seeks a preliminary junction which orders

28 {1} "that [Defendants] shall not re 1

to deliver publications

1 sent to prisoners at the County jails on the ground that the

2 publications contain staples, provided that Defendants may comply

3 by removing the staples" and (2) "that Defendants shall provide

4 adequate written notice and an administrative appeal process to

5 both prisoners and senders when Defendants refuse to deliver

6 publications to prisoners at the County jails."

7

As to the first portion of the preliminary injunction sought

8 by Plaintiff, Defendants primarily challenge Plaintiff's claim

9 that Plaintiff has shown it is likely to suffer irreparable harm

10 in the absence of a preliminary injunction. Specifically,

11 Defendants argue that despite their past practices, they have not

12 only ceased a disputed practice but actually implemented a new

13 policy (Policy 1009 effective November 4, 2015) which allows the

14 delivery of Plaintiff's publications to jail inmates after the

15 staff removes any staples and tapes the publications closed.

16 Thus, the instant case is unlike other cases where courts have

17 found that a policy change was only a temporary withdrawal of an

18 alleged policy or suspension of enforcement of the policy at

19 issue and, therefore, a preliminary injunction was appropriate.

20 Instead, this case is similar to Mitchell v. Cate, 2014 LEXIS

21 87274, 2014 WL 2895232 (ED CAL June 24, 2014) where the Court

22 denied a motion for preliminary injunction because Plaintiff did

23 not establish a current likelihood of irreparable harm under the

24 prison's new policy. Given Defendants' unequivocal revision of

25 its previous mail policy and adoption of a new policy that allows

26 mailed publications with staples to be delivered after the

27 removal of staples, the Court finds that Plaintiff has not

28 satisfied its burden of demonstrating a likelihood of irreparable 2

1 injury in

ence of a preliminary injunction regarding the

2 delivery of a iff's publications. The Court also finds that

3 Plaintiff has not made a sufficient showing that a preliminary

4 injunction

Defendants to enforce s new mail policy

5 during the pendency of this action is neces

because

6 Defendants past conduct evidences a threat of immediate

7 irreparable harm. The evidence before the Court demonstrates

8 that Defendants' new policy, although only six weeks old, already

9 has been ef

at remedying the alleged rst Amendment

10 inquiries.

11

As to the second portion of the preliminary unction

12 sought by

i , the Court finds that Plainti has

13 demonstrated a li ihood of success on the mer s

its Due

14 Process claim, that it will suffer irreparable harm in the

15 absence of preliminary injunctive relief and the lance of

16 equities tips cidedly in Plaintiff's favor. Moreover, the

17 preliminary injunction set forth below is in the public interest.

18 Defendants' historical failure to follow its notice policies is

19 sufficient

dence that Plaintiff is likely to succeed on the

20 merits of s due process claim. Unlike the

claim

21 discussed above, Defendants have not provided

cient evidence

22 that they are currently meeting the due process constitutional

23 requirements

notice and a hearing. Plainti has not received

24 proper notice when s publications have been rej

and is

25 therefore likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of

26 preliminary

f.

27

The preliminary injunction set forth below is narrowly

28 drawn, extends no further than necessary to correct the harm the 3

1 Court finds requires preliminary relief, and is the least

2 intrus

means necessary to correct that harm.

3

In

se circumstances, waiver of the bond requirement is

4 appropriate because Plaintiff is a small non-profit organization

5 with limi

resources.

6

ORDER

7

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for Prel

8 Injunction is GRATNED IN PART AS FOLLOWS:

9

Defendants County of Tulare (the "County") and Mike

10 Boudreaux, and their successors, officers, agents, servants,

11 employees, and attorneys, and all others in active concert or

12 participation with them (hereinafter referred to collect ly as

13 "Defendants"), shall provide adequate written notice and an

14 administrative appeal process to both prisoners and

s when

15 Defendants refuse to deliver Plaintiff's publications to

16 prisoners at the County's jails. Such notice and appeal process

17

s may be satisfied through the utilization of a

18 standardi

form similar to that used by the Cali

a

19 Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, attached

as

20 Exhibit 1.

21

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the bond requirement is waived.

22

No rson who has notice of this injunction shall

1 to

23 comply with , nor shall any person subvert the

unction by

24 any sham, indirection or other artifice.

25

IT IS SO ORDERED.

26 Dated:

16, 2015.

27

28

EXHIBIT 1

Case4:07-cv-02058-CW Document17-1 FiledOS/22/07 Page28 of 28

STATf!"'"~Osf.P"C1A·t1.1I;~--~'vU-En1P~~'~r;'n.O'll"At(I:l\f!A!-R~~IOA'RR"S

nn~ument 12-2
A~ REHABlUTAtfON

Filed 11/03/15 · Paae 107 of 109 . ARI'tOLO .SCHWARZENEGGER, GOVERNOR

NAME OF INSTITUTION Institution Address Name of City, CA Zip Code

Date

Recipient Name Organization or Company Address City, State Zip Code

Dear (Name):

This letter is to advise you that your publication entitled (Title of Publication), for the

month of (Month & Year), will not be delivered to inmate(s)

(Enter last names and CDCR numbers of all intended inmate recipients of the

publication) housed at (Name of Institution). This is based on a violation of the

California Code of Regulations, Section (List CCR Section), which states in part,

"(Enter applicable CCR langauge)." Your publication contained material on page(s)

_that was (be specific as to how it violated CCR; i.e., nude photos, article about

making bombs, etc.)

·

Please be advised that you have the right per CCR Section 3137(c) to appeal this issue. CCR 3137(c) states in part, "Appeals relating to facility procedures and practices should be ·addressed in writing to the warden, superintendent or regional administrator of the facility where the appeal arises. The warden, superintendent or regional parole administrator shall provide a written response within 15 working days. Appeals that are not satisfactorily resolved at this level may be forwarded in writing to the Secretary, who shall .Provide a written response within. 20 working days."
Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact (Enter Contact information).
Sincerely,

AUTHOR NAME IN CAPS Title Unit/Division/Department

 
 1 Kathleen Bales-Lange, #094765

2

County Counsel for the County of Tulare Kathleen A. Taylor, #131100

3 Chief Deputy County Counsel

Kevin Stimmel, #292838 4 Deputy County Counsel

5 2900 West Burrel, County Civic Center

Visalia, California 93291 6 Telephone: (559) 636-4950

7 Facsimile: (559) 737-4319 E-mail: kstimmel@co.tulare.ca.us

8

9 Attorneys for Defendant County of Tulare

10

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11

PRISON LEGAL NEWS, a project of the

Case No. 1:15-CV-01650-JAM SAB

12 HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENSE CENTER,

STIPULATION AND CONSENT DECREE

13

Plaintiff(s),

Judge: Hon. John A. Mendez

14 v.

15

COUNTY OF TULARE; MIKE BOUDREAUX, individually and in his

16 capacity as Sheriff-Coroner of the County of Tulare; DOES 1-20, in their individual and

17 official capacities,

18

Defendant(s).

19

20 The parties to this action, represented by counsel, stipulate to and request entry of a consent

21 decree by the court as follows:

22

1. On October 29, 2015, Plaintiff Prison Legal News, a Project of the Human

23 Rights Defense Center ("Plaintiff”) filed suit in the above entitled matter seeking injunctive
24 and declaratory relief, money damages, attorney's fees and costs. Plaintiff’s complaint alleges an unlawful and unconstitutional custom, practice, or policy regarding the delivery
25
of incoming publications and correspondence to prisoners at the County of Tulare jails. The
26
complaint alleges violations of the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States
27
Constitution, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
28

County Counsel Tulare County
Visalia, California
[3013080-2]

1
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] CONSENT DECREE

1

2. Shortly after becoming aware of the Plaintiff’s filed Complaint, Defendant

2 responded immediately by implementing a new mail policy in connection with delivery of

3 the publication.

4

3. On December 7, 2015, Defendants County of Tulare, et al., (collectively

5 “Defendants”) filed an answer denying the allegations of the complaint and raising various

6 affirmative defenses.

7

4. On December 16, 2015, the Court granted Plaintiff’s motion for preliminary

8 injunction in part, and denied in part.

9

5. Plaintiff and Defendants (collectively “Parties”) agree that Defendants have

10 disputed, and continue to dispute and deny, liability. However, in order to avoid the expense,
delay, uncertainty, and burden of litigation the Parties agree to the entry of this consent
11
decree.
12
6. The Parties agree that this consent decree resolves all claims for injunctive
13
relief alleged in the Plaintiff’s Complaint. By this consent decree, together with payment of
14
the sum of fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000.00), the Parties agree that all equitable and
15
damages claims alleged by Plaintiff are fully and finally resolved. The Parties agree that
16
Plaintiff will execute a release of all claims, and that Defendant will remit payment to
17
Plaintiff, within 45 days of the entry of this consent decree by the Court. If payment is not
18
made within (60) days, interest shall accrue pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1961 from the date of
19
entry of this order. The Parties agree that Plaintiff will submit a petition for attorneys’ fees
20 and costs for work performed in this case to the Court, and nothing in this consent decree
21 affects or limits its right to do so. The parties agree that the court shall award Plaintiff such

22 fees and costs pursuant to 42 U.S.C. section 1988 as the prevailing party.

23

7. DEFINITIONS:

24

a. As used herein, STAPLES shall mean the type of light-duty small wire

25

fasteners commonly used to attach a few sheets of paper, and used by Plaintiff to bind

26

the sheets of its monthly publication.

27

b. As used herein, PUBLISHER shall mean any publisher, commercial or non-

28

profit distributor of printed materials, or book store that does mail order business.

County Counsel Tulare County
Visalia, California
[3013080-2]

2
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] CONSENT DECREE

1

8. The Parties agree that Defendants and their successors, officers, agents,

2 servants, and employees, and all others in active concert or participation with them, shall not

3 refuse to deliver publications, correspondence, or documents sent by any PUBLISHER to

4 prisoners at Defendants’ jails on the ground that these publications, correspondence, or

5 documents contain STAPLES, provided that Defendants may comply by removing the

6 STAPLES.

7

9. The Parties agree that Defendants shall provide adequate written notice and an

8 administrative review process to the PUBLISHER of any refusal to deliver any publication,

9 correspondence, or document sent from a PUBLISHER to a prisoner at the Defendants’ jails.

10 The administrative review process shall include the PUBLISHER’s right to have its appeal,
complaint, or inquiry considered and resolved by a decision maker other than the person who
11
originally refused to deliver the publication or mailing in question. Defendants agree to
12
provide a written response to all publication censorship appeals within 15 business days of
13
receiving the appeal.
14
10. The Parties agree that Defendants shall include an explanation of the terms of
15
the Sheriff’s New Mail Policy in relation to delivery of publications and the administrative
16
review process for refused mailings in the Tulare County Jail Handbook for delivery to
17
prisoners and on its website.
18
11. Nothing in this Consent Decree is intended either to create any rights in or
19
grant any cause of action to any person not a party to this Consent Decree, or to release or
20 waive any claim, cause of action, demand, or defense in law or equity that any party to this
21 Consent Decree may have against any person(s) or entity not a party to this Consent Decree.

22

12. If Plaintiff identifies, in future, a violation of this order Plaintiff shall give

23 prompt notice to Defendants to cure said violation. The Parties shall meet and confer (either

24 telephonically or in person) at the earliest possible time in a good-faith effort to resolve the

25 claim before seeking relief from the Court. If the violation is not cured by this meet and

26 confer process between the Parties, Defendants shall be liable for the reasonable attorney’s

27 fees and costs Plaintiff incurred in proving the violation.

28

County Counsel Tulare County
Visalia, California
[3013080-2]

3
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] CONSENT DECREE

1

13. The Court finds that this case concerns the First and Fourteenth Amendment

2 rights of a publisher and is therefore not a case concerning prison conditions as defined in the

3 Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1996. The Court further finds that the relief herein ordered

4 is narrowly drawn, extends no further than necessary to correct the harm alleged by Plaintiff

5 requiring injunctive relief, and is the least intrusive means necessary to correct that alleged

6 harm.

7

14. The Court retains jurisdiction of this matter for the purpose of enforcement of

8 its Order until terminated upon motion made by either party.

9

15. No person who has notice of this consent decree shall fail to comply with it,

10 nor shall any person subvert the injunction by any sham, indirection, or other artifice.

11
12 Dated: 7/1/2016
13 14

MIKE BOUDREAUX Tulare County Sheriff
By: _/s/_____________________________

15

16

17 Dated: 6/28/2016

HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENSE CENTER

18

By: _/s/_____________________________

19

Paul Wright

Editor and Executive Director
20

21 APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CONTENT

22 Dated: 7/1/2016
23

KATHLEEN BALES-LANGE Tulare County Counsel

24

By: _/s/_____________________________

Kevin Stimmel

25

Deputy County Counsel

26

Attorney for Defendants County of Tulare

and Mike Boudreaux
27

28

County Counsel Tulare County
Visalia, California
[3013080-2]

4
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] CONSENT DECREE

1 APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CONTENT

2 Dated: 6/30/2016

ROSEN BIEN GALVAN & GRUNFELD LLP

3

By:_/s/_________________________________

Lisa Ells

4

Attorney for Plaintiff Prison Legal News

5

6
IT IS SO ORDERED.
7

8

9 DATED: 7/5/2016
10
11

/s/ John A. Mendez____________ John A. Mendez, United States District Court Judge

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 County Counsel
Tulare County Visalia, California
[3013080-2]

5
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] CONSENT DECREE

 
 Case 1:15-cv-01650-JAM-SAB Document 43 Filed 07/01/16 Page 1 of 5

I Kathleen Bales-Lange. #094765 County Counsel for the County of Tulare
2 Kathleen A. Taylor, #131100 3 Chief Deputy County Counsel
Kevin Stimmel, #292838 4 Deputy County Counsel 5 2900 West Burrel, County Civic Center
Visalia, California 93291 6 Telephone: (559) 636-4950 7 Facsimile: (559) 737-4319
E-mail: kstimmel@co.tularc.ca.us
8
9 Attorneys for Defendant County of Tulare

10

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

II
PRISON LEGAL NEWS, a project of the

Case No. I: 15-CV-01650-SAB

12 HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENSE CENTER,

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]

13

Plaintiff( s ),

CONSENT DECREE

14 v.

Judge: Hon. John A. Mendez

15

COUNTY OF TULARE; MIKE BOUDREAUX, individually and in his

16

capacity as Sheriff-Coroner of the County of Tulare; DOES 1-20, in their individual and

17 official capacities,

18

Defendant(s).

19

20 The parties to this action, represented by counsel, stipulate to and request entry of a consent

21 decree by the court as follows:

22

I. On October 29, 2015, Plaintiff Prison Legal News, a Project of the Human

23 Rights Defense Center ("Pla_intiff') filed suit in the above entitled matter seeking injunctive

24 and declaratory relief, money damages, attorney's fees and costs. Plaintiffs complaint

alleges an unlawful and unconstitutional custom, practice, or policy regarding the delivery
25
of incoming publications and correspondence to prisoners at the County ofTularejails. The
26
complaint alleges violations of the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States
27
Constitution, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
28

County Counsel Tulare County
lisalia, California

STII'ULATION AND (PROPOSED) CONSENT DECREE

Case 1:15-cv-01650-JAM-SAB Document 43 Filed 07/01/16 Page 2 of 5

2. Shortly after becoming aware of the Plaintifrs filed Complaint, Defendant 2 responded immediately by implementing a new mail policy in connection with delivery of

3 the publication.

4

3. On December 7, 2015, Defendants County of Tulare, et al., (collectively ·

5 ''Defendants") filed an answer denying the allegations of the complaint and raising various

6 affinnative defenses.

7

4. On December 16, 2015, the Court granted Plaintiffs motion for preliminary

8 injunction in part, and denied in part.

9

5. Plaintiff and Defendants (collectively "Parties") agree that Defendants have

10 disputed, and continue to dispute and deny, liability. However, in order to avoid the expense,

11 delay. uncertainty, and burden of litigation the Parties agree to the entry of this consent

decree.

12

6. The Parties agree that this consent decree resolves all claims for injunctive

13 relief alleged in the Plaintiffs Complaint. By this consent decree, together with payment of

14 the sum of fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000.00), the Parties agree that all equitable and

15 damages claims alleged by Plaintiff are fully and.finally resolved. The Parties agree that

16 Plaintiff will ~xecute a release ofall claims, and that Defendant will remit payment to

17 Plaintiff, within 45 days of the entry of this consent decree by the Court. If payment is not

18 made within (60) days, interest shall accrue pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1961 from the date of

19 entry of this order. The Parties agree that Plaintiffwill submit a petition for attorneys' fees

20 and costs for work perfonned in this case to the Court, and nothing in this consent decree ·

21 affects or limits its right to do so. The parties agree that the court shall award Plaintiff such

22 fees and costs pursuant to 42 U.S.C. section 1988 as the prevailing party.

23

7. DEFINITIONS:

24

a. As used herein, STAPLES shall mean the type of light-duty small wire

25

· fasteners commonly used to attach a few sheets of paper, and used by Plaintiff to bind

26

the sheets of its monthly publication.

27

b. As used herein, PUBLISHER shall mean any publisher, commercial or non-

28

profit distributor of printed materials, or book store that does mail order business.

County Counsel Tulare County
IJsalia, California

2 STIPULATION AND tpROPOSEI>J CONSBNT DECREE

Case 1:15-cv-01650-JAM-SAB Document 43 Filed 07/01/16 Page 3 of 5

8. The Parties agree that Defendants and their successors, officers, agents, 2 servants, and employees, and all others in active concert or participation with them, shall no 3 refuse to deliver publications, correspondence, or documents sent by any PUBLISHER to 4 prisoners at Defendants' jails on the ground that these publications, correspondence.·or
s documents contain STAPLES, provided that Defendants may comply by removing the
6 STAPLES.

7

9. The Parties agree that Defendants shall provide adequate written notice and an

8 administrative review process to the PUBLISHER of any refusal to deliver any publication,

9 correspondence, or document sent from a PUBLISHER to a prisoner at the Defendants• jails

10 The administrative review process shall include the PUBLISHER's right to have its appeal.

11 complaint, or inquiry considered and resolved by a decision maker other than the person wh<

12 originally refused to deliver the publication or mailing in question. Defendants agree to

13 provide a written response to all publication censorship appeals within 15 business days of

receiving the appeal.
14

IS

I0. The Parties agree that Defendants shall include an explanation ofthe terms of

the Sheriffs New Mail Policy in relation to delivery of publications and the administrative
16

review process for refused mailings in the Tulare County Jail Handbook for delivery to
17
prisoners and on its website.

)8
ll. Nothing in this Consent Decree is intended either to create any rights in or

19
grant any cause ofaction to any person not a party to this Consent Decree, or to release or

20 waive any claim, cause of action, demand, or defense in law or equity that any party to this

21 Consent pecree may have against any person(s) or entity not a party to this Consent Decree.

22

12. If Plaintiff identifies, in future, a violation of this order Plaintiffshall give

23 prompt notice to Defendants to cure said violation. The Parties shall meet and confer (either

24 telephonically or in person) at the earliest possible time in a good-faith effort to resolve the

25 claim before seekirig relief from the Court. If the violation is not cured by this meet and

26 confer process between the Parties, Defendants shall be liable for the reasonable attorney's

27 fees and costs Plaintiff incurred in proving the violation.

28

County Counsel Tulare County
'isalia, Callromia

3
STIPULATION AND IPROPOSED) CONSENT DECREE

Case 1:15-cv-01650-JAM-SAB Document 43 Filed 07/01/16 Page 4 of 5

13. · The Court finds that this case concerns the First and Fourteenth Amendment 2 rights ofa publisher and is therefore not a case concerning prison conditions as defmed in the 3 Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1996. The Court further finds that the reliefherein ordered 4 is narrowly drawn, extends no further than necessary to correct the hann alleged by Plaintiff
s requiring injunctive relief, and is the least intrusive means necessary to correct that alleged

6 harm.

7

14. The Court retains jurisdiction of this matter for the purpose of enforcement of.

8 its Order until terminated upon motion made by either party.

9

15. No person who has notice ofthis consent decree shall fail to comply with it,

10 nor shall any person subvert the injunction by any sham, indirection, or other artifice.

II
12 Dated: 7-1--lf..,
13 14

MIKE BOUDREAUX Tulare County Sheriff
By: ~6ou~

IS

6(Zf{/ 16
17 Dated:

'/.0(6

18

19

20

21 APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CONTENT

22 Dated: 7/il/k
23 24 25
26
27

KATHLEEN BALES-LANGE Tulare County Counsel
By: Jf4::.. J/;U
Kevin Stimmel Deputy County Counsel Attorney for Defendants County ofTulare and Mike Boudreaux

28

County Counsel Tulare County
lisa!ia, California

4 STIPUI.ATION ANI> H'ROPOSI~Il] CONSENT l>F.CREF.

Case 1:15-cv-01650-JAM-SAB Document 43 Filed 07/01/16 Page 5 of 5

I
2 3

APPROVEJ? AS TO
Dated: GLJo/lb

FORM

AND
.

CONTENTROSENBIENG~~GRUNFELDLLP

By:_ _ _ _ _ _~--------'-

Lisa Ells

4

Attorney for PlaintiffPrison Legal News

5

6
IT IS SO ORDERED.
7

8

9 DATED:
10
It

John A. Mendez, United States District Court Judge

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

County Counsel Tulare County
lisalia, California

5 STIPULATION AND (PROPOSED] CONSENT DECREE

 
 Case: 1:15-cv-01650-JAM-SAB As of: 03/21/2020 12:25 PM PDT 1 of 6
CIVIL,CLOSED
U.S. District Court Eastern District of California − Live System (Fresno) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:15−cv−01650−JAM−SAB

Prison Legal News v. County of Tulare et al Assigned to: District Judge John A. Mendez Referred to: Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone Cause: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff

Date Filed: 10/29/2015 Date Terminated: 07/06/2016 Jury Demand: Plaintiff Nature of Suit: 440 Civil Rights: Other Jurisdiction: Federal Question

Prison Legal News a project of the Human Rights Defense Center

represented by Lance Weber , PHV Human Rights Defense Center P.O. Box 1151 Lake Worth, FL 33460 561−360−2523 Fax: 866−735−7136 Email: lweber@humanrightsdefensecenter.org LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Sabarish Neelakanta , PHV Human Rights Defense Center P.O. Box 1151 Lake Worth, FL 33460 561−360−2523 Fax: 561−735−7136 Email: sneelakanta@humanrightsdefensecenter.org LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Christopher David Hu Rosen Bien Galvan & Grunfeld LLP 50 Fremont Street 19th Floor San Francisco, CA 94105 (415) 433−6830 Fax: (415) 433−7104 Email: chu@rbgg.com TERMINATED: 02/07/2020

Lisa Adrienne Ells Rosen Bien Galvan and Grunfeld LLP 50 Fremont Street 19th Floor San Francisco, CA 94105 415−433−6830 Fax: 415−433−7104 Email: lells@rbgg.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff Human Rights Defense Center

represented by Jeffrey L. Bornstein Rosen Bien Galvan Grunfeld LLP 101 Mission St. Sixth Floor San Francisco, CA 94105 415−433−6830 Fax: 415−433−7104 Email: JBornstein@rbgg.com

Case: 1:15-cv-01650-JAM-SAB As of: 03/21/2020 12:25 PM PDT 2 of 6
LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V. Defendant County of Tulare
Defendant Mike Boudreaux individually and in his capacity as Sheriff−Coroner of the County of Tulare

represented by Kathleen A. Taylor Tulare County Counsels Office 2900 W. Burrel Ave. Visalia, CA 93291 (559) 636−4971 Fax: (559) 737−4319 Email: KTaylor@co.tulare.ca.us LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Kevin Alan Stimmel Tulare County Counsel 2900 W Burrel County Civic Center Visalia, CA 93291 (559) 636−4950 Fax: (559) 737−4319 Email: k.stimmel@outlook.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Kathleen A. Taylor (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Kevin Alan Stimmel (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 10/29/2015 10/29/2015 10/29/2015
10/29/2015
10/29/2015

# Docket Text
1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants by Prison Legal News. Attorney Ells, Lisa Adrienne added. (Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0972−6150163) (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Ells, Lisa) (Entered: 10/29/2015)
2 NOTICE of RELATED CASE 2:11−CV−00907 by Prison Legal News. (Ells, Lisa) (Entered: 10/29/2015)
3 SUMMONS ISSUED as to *Mike Boudreaux* with answer to complaint due within *21* days. Attorney *Lisa Adrienne Ells* *Rosen Bien Galvan and Grunfeld LLP* *50 Fremont Street, 19th Floor* *San Francisco, CA 94105*. (Jessen, A) (Entered: 10/29/2015)
4 SUMMONS ISSUED as to *County of Tulare* with answer to complaint due within *21* days. Attorney *Lisa Adrienne Ells* *Rosen Bien Galvan and Grunfeld LLP* *50 Fremont Street, 19th Floor* *San Francisco, CA 94105*. (Jessen, A) (Entered: 10/29/2015)
5 CIVIL NEW CASE DOCUMENTS ISSUED: Status Conference re Consent / Initial Scheduling Conference set for 2/2/2016 at 09:45 AM in Courtroom 9 (SAB) before Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone. (Attachments: # 1 Order Assigning Action to Sac DJ, # 2 Consent Form, # 3 VDRP) (Jessen, A) (Entered: 10/29/2015)

Case: 1:15-cv-01650-JAM-SAB As of: 03/21/2020 12:25 PM PDT 3 of 6

10/30/2015 11/02/2015
11/02/2015 11/03/2015 11/03/2015 11/03/2015 11/03/2015
11/04/2015
11/04/2015
11/04/2015 11/04/2015 11/05/2015 11/05/2015 11/10/2015 11/10/2015 11/20/2015 11/20/2015 12/02/2015

6 DECLINE to PROCEED BEFORE US MAGISTRATE JUDGE by Prison Legal News. (Ells, Lisa) (Entered: 10/30/2015)
7 MINUTE ORDER: (TEXT ENTRY ONLY) Due to the decline to magistrate jurisdiction, the Clerk's office is instructed to randomly assign a Sacramento District Judge to this case. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 11/2/2015. (Hernandez, M) (Entered: 11/02/2015)
8 CLERK'S NOTICE: This case has been assigned to U.S. District Judge Mendez; the new case number is 1:15−cv−1650 JAM−SAB. (Martin−Gill, S) (Entered: 11/02/2015)
9 SUMMONS RETURNED EXECUTED: County of Tulare served on 11/2/2015, answer due 11/23/2015. (Ells, Lisa) (Entered: 11/03/2015)
10 SUMMONS RETURNED EXECUTED: Mike Boudreaux served on 11/3/2015, answer due 11/24/2015. (Ells, Lisa) (Entered: 11/03/2015)
11 ORDER REQUIRING JOINT STATUS REPORT (Attachments: # 1 Order re Filing Requirements) (Donati, J) (Entered: 11/03/2015)
12 MOTION for PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION by Prison Legal News. Motion Hearing set for 12/16/2015 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 6 (JAM) before Judge John A. Mendez. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order , # 2 Declaration of Paul Wright, # 3 Declaration of John Clark, # 4 Declaration of Jacob Chavez, # 5 Declaration of Eduardo Martinez, # 6 Declaration of John Moisa, # 7 Declaration of Michael Serna, # 8 Proof of Service)(Ells, Lisa) Modified on 11/4/2015 (Kastilahn, A). (Entered: 11/03/2015)
13 PRO HAC VICE APPLICATION and PROPOSED ORDER submitted by Prison Legal News for attorney Lance Weber to appear Pro Hac Vice. (Filing fee $ 200, receipt number 0972−6158211) (Attachments: # 1 Lance Weber Certificate of Good Standing)(Ells, Lisa) (Entered: 11/04/2015)
14 PRO HAC VICE APPLICATION and PROPOSED ORDER submitted by Prison Legal News for attorney Sabarish Neelakanta to appear Pro Hac Vice. (Filing fee $ 200, receipt number 0972−6158241) (Attachments: # 1 Sabarish Neelakanta Certificate of Good Standing)(Ells, Lisa) (Entered: 11/04/2015)
15 SUMMONS RETURNED EXECUTED: (Attachments: # 1 Proof of Service)(Ells, Lisa) (Entered: 11/04/2015)
16 SUMMONS RETURNED EXECUTED: (Attachments: # 1 Proof of Service)(Ells, Lisa) (Entered: 11/04/2015)
17 PRO HAC VICE ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 11/4/15. Added attorney Sabarish Neelakanta, PHV for Prison Legal News.(Mena−Sanchez, L) (Entered: 11/05/2015)
18 PRO HAC VICE ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 11/4/15. Added attorney Lance Weber, PHV for Prison Legal News. (Mena−Sanchez, L) (Entered: 11/05/2015)
19 DECLARATION of Darrin Wright in SUPPORT OF 12 MOTION for PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION . (Attachments: # 1 Proof of Service)(Ells, Lisa) (Entered: 11/10/2015)
20 DECLARATION of Marwin McDarment in SUPPORT OF 12 MOTION for PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION . (Ells, Lisa) (Entered: 11/10/2015)
21 STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT by Mike Boudreaux, County of Tulare. Attorney Stimmel, Kevin Alan added. (Stimmel, Kevin) (Entered: 11/20/2015)
22 CONSENT to JURISDICTION of US MAGISTRATE JUDGE by Mike Boudreaux, County of Tulare. (Stimmel, Kevin) (Entered: 11/20/2015)
23 OPPOSITION to 12 Motion for Preliminary Injunction by Mike Boudreaux, County of Tulare (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Thomas Sigley, # 2 Declaration of Kevin Stimmel) (Stimmel, Kevin) Modified on 12/18/2015 (Michel, G.). (Entered: 12/02/2015)

Case: 1:15-cv-01650-JAM-SAB As of: 03/21/2020 12:25 PM PDT 4 of 6

12/07/2015 12/09/2015 12/16/2015 12/16/2015 01/21/2016 01/22/2016 02/10/2016 02/22/2016 02/26/2016
02/26/2016
02/26/2016

24 ANSWER with Jury Demand by Mike Boudreaux, County of Tulare.(Stimmel, Kevin) (Entered: 12/07/2015)
25 REPLY by Prison Legal News re 23 Opposition to Motion. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Paul Wright)(Hu, Christopher) (Entered: 12/09/2015)
26 MINUTES (Text Only) for proceedings before Judge John A. Mendez: Hearing on Plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction held on 12/16/2015. After hearing argument, the Court ordered the matter submitted. Plaintiffs Counsel L. Ells present. Defendants Counsel K. Stimmel; A. Terrible present. Court Reporter: K. O'Halloran. (Vine, H) (Entered: 12/16/2015)
27 ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 12/16/2015 GRANTING−IN−PART and DENYING−IN−PART 12 Motion for Preliminary Injunction. (Donati, J) (Entered: 12/16/2015)
28 STIPULATION and PROPOSED ORDER for Continuance of Initial Scheduling Conference by Mike Boudreaux, County of Tulare. (Stimmel, Kevin) (Entered: 01/21/2016)
29 MINUTE ORDER: (TEXT ENTRY ONLY)Due to the decline to magistrate jurisdiction and assignment to U.S. District Judge Mendez, the Initial Scheduling Conference set for 2/2/2016 before Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone is taken off calendar. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 1/22/2016. (Hernandez, M) (Entered: 01/22/2016)
30 MINUTE ORDER: The parties shall file a joint status report on or before February 26, 2016. (TEXT ENTRY ONLY) (Vine, H) (Entered: 02/10/2016)
31 STIPULATION and PROPOSED ORDER for appointment of Magistrate Judge Brennan to mediate Settlement Conference by Prison Legal News. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Ells, Lisa) Modified on 2/26/2016 (Marciel, M) (Entered: 02/22/2016)
32 MINUTE ORDER: Settlement Conference set for 4/21/2016 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 8 (EFB) before Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan. The parties are directed to submit confidential settlement conference statements via e−mail (efborders@caed.uscourts.gov) to chambers seven (7) days prior to the settlement conference. Such statements are neither to be filed with the clerk nor served on opposing counsel. However, each party shall e−file a one page document entitled Notice of Submission of Confidential Settlement Conference Statement. The parties may agree, or not, to serve each other with the settlement statements. Each party is reminded of the requirement that it be represented in person at the settlement conference by a person able to dispose of the case or fully authorized to settle the matter at the settlement conference on any terms. See Local Rule 270. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 2/26/2016. (Text only entry)(Cannarozzi, N) (Entered: 02/26/2016)
33 AMENDED MINUTE ORDER re: 32 . The hearing date for the Settlement Conference is RESET from 4/21/2016 to 4/7/2016 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 8 (EFB) before Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan. The parties are directed to submit confidential settlement conference statements via e−mail (efborders@caed.uscourts.gov) to chambers seven (7) days prior to the settlement conference. Such statements are neither to be filed with the clerk nor served on opposing counsel. However, each party shall e−file a one page document entitled Notice of Submission of Confidential Settlement Conference Statement. The parties may agree, or not, to serve each other with the settlement statements. Each party is reminded of the requirement that it be represented in person at the settlement conference by a person able to dispose of the case or fully authorized to settle the matter at the settlement conference on any terms. See Local Rule 270. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 2/26/2016. (Text only entry)(Cannarozzi, N) (Entered: 02/26/2016)
34 STIPULATION and ORDER 31 for Settlement Judge assignment signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 2/25/2016. Court, having reviewed parties' Joint Stipulation and good cause appearing, Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan is hereby APPOINTED to mediate a Settlement Conference. (Marciel, M) (Entered: 02/26/2016)

Case: 1:15-cv-01650-JAM-SAB As of: 03/21/2020 12:25 PM PDT 5 of 6

02/29/2016
04/14/2016 04/14/2016 04/21/2016
04/22/2016
05/20/2016 06/24/2016 06/24/2016 07/01/2016 07/06/2016 07/07/2016 07/08/2016
08/08/2016 08/08/2016

35 SECOND AMENDED MINUTE ORDER: The previously issued Minute Order 33 is VACATED. The Settlement Conference will remain set for 4/21/2016 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 8 (EFB) before Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan. The parties are directed to submit confidential settlement conference statements via e−mail (efborders@caed.usco urts.gov) to chambers seven (7) days prior to the settlement conference. Such statements are neither to be filed with the clerk nor served on opposing counsel. However, each party shall e−file a one page document entitled Notice of Submission of Confidential Settlement Conference Statement. The parties may agree, or not, to serve each other with the settlement statements. Each party is reminded of the requirement that it be represented in person at the settlement conference by a person able to dispose of the case or fully authorized to settle the matter at the settlement conference on any terms. See Local Rule 270. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 2/29/2016. (Text only entry) (Cannarozzi, N) (Entered: 02/29/2016)
36 NOTICE of Submission of Confidential Settlement Conference Statement by Prison Legal News. (Ells, Lisa) (Entered: 04/14/2016)
37 NOTICE of Submission of Confidential Settlement Conference Statement by All Defendants. Attorney Taylor, Kathleen A. added. (Taylor, Kathleen) (Entered: 04/14/2016)
38 MINUTES (Text Only) for SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE held on 4/21/2016 before Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan: All parties present. After discussions with the Court, the case was settled. The terms of the settlement were placed on the record. Court order to issue. Plaintiffs Counsel Lisa Ells present. Defendants Counsel Kevin Stimmel and Kathleen Taylor present. Court Reporter/CD Number: ECRO, CD 1 of 1. (Cannarozzi, N) (Entered: 04/21/2016)
39 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 04/21/16 ORDERING that the proposed consent decree shall be submitted to the district judge with 21 days; parties shall submit a stipulated briefing schedule on the anticipated motion for attorney's fees. All hearing dates set in this matter are VACATED. (Benson, A) (Entered: 04/22/2016)
40 JOINT STATEMENT re Proposed Consent Decree. (Hu, Christopher) Modified on 5/20/2016 (Becknal, R). (Entered: 05/20/2016)
41 STIPULATION and PROPOSED ORDER for Extension of Time to File Consent Decree by Mike Boudreaux, County of Tulare. (Taylor, Kathleen) (Entered: 06/24/2016)
42 STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 6/24/2016 GRANTING Request for Extension of Time to File Consent Decree. The parties shall file their consent decree no later than 7/1/2016. (Donati, J) (Entered: 06/24/2016)
43 STIPULATION and Proposed Consent Decree by Mike Boudreaux, County of Tulare. (Taylor, Kathleen) Modified on 7/1/2016 (Becknal, R). (Entered: 07/01/2016)
44 STIPULATION and CONSENT DECREE signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 07/05/2016. CASE CLOSED. (Jackson, T) (Entered: 07/06/2016)
45 STIPULATION and PROPOSED ORDER for Setting Briefing Schedule by Mike Boudreaux, County of Tulare. (Taylor, Kathleen) (Entered: 07/07/2016)
46 STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 7/7/2016 ORDERING that plaintiff's fee application is to be filed on or before 9/1/2016. Defendants' opposition to plaintiff's fee application to be filed on or before 9/30/2016. Plaintiff's reply in support of their fee application to be filed on or before 10/11/2016. The hearing on this motion shall be set for 10/18/2016 at 1:30 PM before Judge Mendez. (Zignago, K.) (Entered: 07/08/2016)
47 NOTICE of ACCEPTANCE with OFFER of JUDGMENT by Prison Legal News. (Attachments: # 1 Proof of Service)(Ells, Lisa) (Entered: 08/08/2016)
48 [PROPOSED] Judgment re 47 Notice of Acceptance with Offer of Judgment − ATY by Prison Legal News. (Ells, Lisa) Modified on 8/9/2016 (Mena−Sanchez, L). (Entered: 08/08/2016)

Case: 1:15-cv-01650-JAM-SAB As of: 03/21/2020 12:25 PM PDT 6 of 6

08/09/2016
02/07/2020 02/18/2020

49 JUDGMENT signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 8/8/16 ORDERING that judgment is granted in favor of Plaintiff in the amount of $140,000.00 against Defendants for Plaintiff's attorneys' fees and costs accrued as of 8/4/2016, the date of Defendants' Offer of Judgment. Plaintiff's equitable and damages claims were previously resolved pursuant to the parties' stipulation and consent decree, which this Court entered on 7/5/2016. (Kastilahn, A) (Entered: 08/09/2016)
50 NOTICE of RELATED CASE(S) 20−cv−00285 by Human Rights Defense Center. Attorney Bornstein, Jeffrey L. added. (Bornstein, Jeffrey) (Entered: 02/07/2020)
51 NOTICE of RELATED CASE(S) 20−cv−00359−WBS−DMC by Human Rights Defense Center. (Bornstein, Jeffrey) (Entered: 02/18/2020)