Case: 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB As of: 01/30/2019 12:49 PM PST 1 of 19
(DTBx),CLOSED,DISCOVERY,PROTORD,REOPENED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA (Western Division − Los Angeles)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:11−cv−00254−CAS−DTB

David Bryant v. Federal Bureau of Prisons et al Assigned to: Judge Christina A. Snyder Referred to: Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow Case in other court: 9th CCA, 11−56371 Cause: 28:1343 Violation of Civil Rights
Plaintiff
David Bryant

Date Filed: 01/07/2011 Date Terminated: 10/19/2016 Jury Demand: Plaintiff Nature of Suit: 440 Civil Rights: Other Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Defendant
represented by Adam S Paris Sullivan and Cromwell LLP 1888 Century Park East Suite 2100 Los Angeles, CA 90067−1725 310−712−6600 Fax: 310−712−8800 Email: parisa@sullcrom.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Adam M Shapiro Sullivan and Cromwell LLP 125 Broad Street New York, NY 10004−2498 212−558−4733 Fax: 212−291−9262 Email: shapiroa@sullcrom.com PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Andrew E Gelfand Sullivan and Cromwell LLP 125 Broad Street 32nd Floor New York, NY 10004−2498 212−558−4097 Fax: 212−291−9298 Email: gelfanda@sullcrom.com TERMINATED: 09/29/2014 PRO HAC VICE

Andrew L Van Houter Sullivan and Cromwell LLP 125 Broad Street New York, NY 10004−2498 212−558−4246 Fax: 212−291−9943 Email: vanhoutera@sullcrom.com TERMINATED: 12/23/2015 PRO HAC VICE

Deborah M Golden PO Box 1346 Washington, DC 20013 202−630−0332 Email: deb.golden@gmail.com PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Jamie L Kringstein Sullivan and Cromwell LLP 125 Broad Street New York, NY 10004−2498

Case: 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB As of: 01/30/2019 12:49 PM PST 2 of 19
212−558−3184 Fax: 212−291−9450 Email: kringsteinj@sullcrom.com PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Lauren J McGrory Sullivan and Cromwell LLP 1888 Century Park East Suite 2100 Los Angeles, CA 90067 310−712−6600 Fax: 310−712−8800 Email: mcgroryl@sullcrom.com TERMINATED: 02/17/2016 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Lauren R Mendolera Sullivan Cromwell LLP 125 Broad Street New York, NY 10004−2498 212−558−3806 Fax: 212−291−9939 Email: mendoleral@sullcrom.com PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Matthew S Fitzwater Sullivan and Cromwell LLP 125 Broad Street 32nd Floor New York, NY 10004−2498 212−558−1632 Fax: 212−291−9282 Email: fitzwatm@sullcrom.com TERMINATED: 12/29/2013 PRO HAC VICE
Megan R O'Flynn Sullivan and Cromwell LLP 125 Broad Street New York, NY 10004−2498 212−558−4484 Fax: 212−291−9909 Email: oflynnm@sullcrom.com PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Rory Price Culver Sullivan and Cromwell LLP 1888 Century Park East Suite 2100 Los Angeles, CA 90067−1725 310−712−6600 Fax: 310−712−8800 Email: culverr@sullcrom.com TERMINATED: 03/06/2015
Timothea GP Letson Sullivan and Cromwell LLP 125 Broad Street 32nd Floor New York, NY 10004−2498 212−2558−4121 Fax: 212−291−9372 Email: letsont@sullcrom.com TERMINATED: 12/29/2013 PRO HAC VICE

Case: 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB As of: 01/30/2019 12:49 PM PST 3 of 19

V. Defendant United States Bureau of Prisons TERMINATED: 12/20/2013
Defendant Harley G. Lappin in his official capacity as Director of the United States Bureau of Prisons TERMINATED: 12/20/2013
Defendant Robert E. MCFadden in his official capacity as Regional Director of the United States Bureau of Prions Western Region TERMINATED: 12/20/2013
Defendant Francisco J. Quintana in his official capacity as Warden of USP Victorville TERMINATED: 12/20/2013
Defendant Federal Bureau of Prisons

represented by Monica L Miller AUSA − Office of US Attorney Civil Division − Federal Building 300 North Los Angeles Street Suite 7516 Los Angeles, CA 90012 213−894−4061 Fax: 213−894−7819 Email: monica.miller@usdoj.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Chung Hae Han US Attorneys Office 300 North Los Angeles Street Suite 7516 Los Angeles, CA 90012 213−894−0474 Fax: 213−894−7819 Email: chung.han@usdoj.gov TERMINATED: 12/09/2016 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Monica L Miller (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Chung Hae Han (See above for address) TERMINATED: 12/09/2016 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Monica L Miller (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Chung Hae Han (See above for address) TERMINATED: 12/09/2016 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Monica L Miller (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Chung Hae Han (See above for address) TERMINATED: 12/09/2016 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Monica L Miller (See above for address)

Case: 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB As of: 01/30/2019 12:49 PM PST 4 of 19

LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Chung Hae Han (See above for address) TERMINATED: 12/09/2016 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Charles Samuels, Jr in his official capacity as Director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons

represented by Monica L Miller (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Chung Hae Han (See above for address) TERMINATED: 12/09/2016 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Juan Castillo in his official capacity as Regional Director of the Western Region of the Federal Bureau of Prisons

represented by Monica L Miller (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Chung Hae Han (See above for address) TERMINATED: 12/09/2016 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 01/07/2011
01/07/2011 01/07/2011 01/07/2011
01/07/2011

# Docket Text
1 COMPLAINT against Defendants Harley G. Lappin, Robert E. MCFadden, Francisco J. Quintana, United States Bureau of Prisons. Case assigned to Judge Mariana R. Pfaelzer for all further proceedings. Discovery referred to Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow.(Filing fee $ 350 PAID.) Jury Demanded., filed by Plaintiff David Bryant. (et) (ds). (Entered: 01/14/2011)
21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint − (Discovery) 1 as to Defendants Harley G. Lappin, Robert E. MCFadden, Francisco J. Quintana, United States Bureau of Prisons. (et) (Entered: 01/14/2011)
2 CERTIFICATION AND NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff David Bryant. (et) (ds). (Entered: 01/14/2011)
3 NOTICE OF FILING FEE DUE on Pro Hac Vice Application mailed to Deborah Golden for Plaintiff David Bryant. Your Pro Hac Vice application has not been received by the court. Please return your completed Application of Non−Resident Attorney to Appear in a Specific Case, form G−64, or a copy of the Notice of Electronic Filing of your application and the $275.00 fee and this notice immediately. Out−of−state federal government attorneys who are not employed by the U.S. Department of Justice are required to file a Pro Hac Vice application; no filing fee is required. (et) (Entered: 01/14/2011)
4 NOTICE OF FILING FEE DUE on Pro Hac Vice Application mailed to Matthew S. Fitzwater for Plaintiff David Bryant. Your Pro Hac Vice application has not been received by the court. Please return your completed Application of Non−Resident Attorney to Appear in a Specific Case, form G−64, or a copy of the Notice of Electronic Filing of your application and the $275.00 fee and this notice immediately. Out−of−state federal government attorneys who are not employed by the U.S. Department of Justice are required to file a Pro Hac Vice application; no filing fee is required. (et) (Entered: 01/14/2011)

Case: 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB As of: 01/30/2019 12:49 PM PST 5 of 19

01/07/2011
01/14/2011 02/04/2011 02/04/2011 02/08/2011 02/10/2011 02/10/2011 02/11/2011
02/11/2011
02/11/2011

5 NOTICE OF FILING FEE DUE on Pro Hac Vice Application mailed to Timothea G.P. Letson for Plaintiff David Bryant. Your Pro Hac Vice application has not been received by the court. Please return your completed Application of Non−Resident Attorney to Appear in a Specific Case, form G−64, or a copy of the Notice of Electronic Filing of your application and the $275.00 fee and this notice immediately. Out−of−state federal government attorneys who are not employed by the U.S. Department of Justice are required to file a Pro Hac Vice application; no filing fee is required. (et) (Entered: 01/14/2011)
6 ORDER RETURNING CASE FOR REASSIGNMENT by Judge Mariana R. Pfaelzer. ORDER case returned to the Clerk for random reassignment pursuant to General Order 08−05. Case randomly reassigned from Judge Mariana R. Pfaelzer to Judge Christina A. Snyder for all further proceedings. The case number will now reflect the initials of the transferee Judge CV 11−00254 CAS(DTBx). (rn) (Entered: 01/14/2011)
7 APPLICATION for attorney Matthew S. Fitzwater to Appear Pro Hac Vice (PHV FEE PAID.) filed by plaintiff David Bryant. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Culver, Rory) Modified on 2/17/2011 (gk). (Entered: 02/04/2011)
8 APPLICATION for attorney Timothea G.P. Letson to Appear Pro Hac Vice (PHV FEE PAID.) filed by plaintiff David Bryant. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Culver, Rory) Modified on 2/17/2011 (gk). (Entered: 02/04/2011)
9 NOTICE OF CLERICAL ERROR: Due to clerical error Re: Notice of Filing Fee Due (PHV), Notice of Filing Fee Due (PHV), Notice of Filing Fee Due (PHV) 4 , Notice of Filing Fee Due (PHV), Notice of Filing Fee Due (PHV), Notice of Filing Fee Due (PHV) 5 , Notice of Filing Fee Due (PHV), Notice of Filing Fee Due (PHV), Notice of Filing Fee Due (PHV) 3 . The case title does not match the case number on the Notice of Filing Fee Due. The correct case title should be David Bryant vs. United States Bureau of Prisons. (et) (Entered: 02/08/2011)
10 NOTICE OF CLERICAL ERROR: Due to clerical error Re: Returning Case for Reassignment w/i division (CV 89) 6 , An incorrect case number, district and magistrate judge's initials were indicated in the document. The correct case number, district and magistrate judge's initials is CV 11−00254 CAS(DTBx). An amended "Order Returning Case For Reassignment" is attached to this Notice. (Attachments: # 1 Amended Order) (rn) (Entered: 02/10/2011)
15 NOTICE TO COUNSEL by Judge Christina A. Snyder. This case has been assigned to the calendar of Judge Christina A. Snyder. *See order for procedures and requirements.* (vdr) (Entered: 02/11/2011)
11 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff David Bryant, upon Defendant United States Bureau of Prisons served on 1/12/2011, answer due 3/13/2011. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon the United States Attorneys Office by delivering a copy to Patricia Myles, Legal Assistant. Executed upon the Attorney Generals Office of the United States by delivering a copy to Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice. Executed upon the officer agency or corporation by delivering a copy to Harley G. Lappin, Director of U.S. Bureau of Prisons. Service was executed in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Due diligence declaration NOT attached. Registered or certified mail return receipt attached. Original Summons NOT returned. (Paris, Adam) (Entered: 02/11/2011)
12 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff David Bryant, upon Defendant Harley G. Lappin served on 1/12/2011, answer due 3/13/2011. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon the United States Attorneys Office by delivering a copy to Patricia Myles, Legal Assistant. Executed upon the Attorney Generals Office of the United States by delivering a copy to Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice. Executed upon the officer agency or corporation by delivering a copy to Harley G. Lappin, Director of U.S. Prisons. Service was executed in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Due diligence declaration NOT attached. Registered or certified mail return receipt attached. Original Summons NOT returned. (Paris, Adam) (Entered: 02/11/2011)
13 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff David Bryant, upon Defendant Robert E. MCFadden served on 1/12/2011, answer due 3/13/2011. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon the United States Attorneys Office by delivering a

Case: 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB As of: 01/30/2019 12:49 PM PST 6 of 19

02/11/2011
02/22/2011 02/22/2011 03/14/2011 03/14/2011
03/15/2011 04/15/2011 04/18/2011 05/31/2011
05/31/2011

copy to Patricia Myles, Legal Assistant. Executed upon the Attorney Generals Office of the United States by delivering a copy to Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice. Executed upon the officer agency or corporation by delivering a copy to Harley G. Lappin, Director of U.S. Bureau of Prisons. Service was executed in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Due diligence declaration NOT attached. Registered or certified mail return receipt attached. Original Summons NOT returned. (Paris, Adam) (Entered: 02/11/2011)
14 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff David Bryant, upon Defendant Francisco J. Quintana served on 1/12/2011, answer due 3/13/2011. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon the United States Attorneys Office by delivering a copy to Patricia Myles, Legal Assistant. Executed upon the Attorney Generals Office of the United States by delivering a copy to Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice. Executed upon the officer agency or corporation by delivering a copy to Harley G. Lappin, Director of U.S. Bureau of Prisons. Service was executed in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Due diligence declaration NOT attached. Registered or certified mail return receipt attached. Original Summons NOT returned. (Paris, Adam) (Entered: 02/11/2011)
16 ORDER by Judge Christina A. Snyder: granting 7 Application to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Attorney Matthew S. Fitzwater on behalf of David Bryant, designating Adam S. Paris as local counsel. (lt) (Entered: 02/23/2011)
17 ORDER by Judge Christina A. Snyder: granting 8 Application to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Attorney Timothea G.P. Letson on behalf of David Bryant, designating Adam S. Paris as local counsel. (lt) (Entered: 02/23/2011)
18 STIPULATION for Extension of Time to File Answer to April 28, 2011 re Complaint − (Discovery), Complaint − (Discovery) 1 filed by Defendants Harley G. Lappin, Robert E. MCFadden, Francisco J. Quintana, United States Bureau of Prisons. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Miller, Monica) (Entered: 03/14/2011)
19 NOTICE of Change of Attorney Information for attorney Chung Hae Han counsel for Defendants Harley G. Lappin, Robert E. MCFadden, Francisco J. Quintana, United States Bureau of Prisons. Changing e−mail to chung.han@usdoj.gov. Adding Chung H. Han as attorney as counsel of record for Defendants U.S. BOP; Harley G. Lappin, Director of the U.S. BOP; Robert McFadden, Regional Director of the U.S. BOP; and Francisco J. Quintana, Warden for the reason indicated in the G−06 Notice. Filed by Defendants U.S. BOP; Harley G. Lappin, Director of the U.S. BOP; Robert McFadden, Regional Director of the U.S. BOP; and Francisco J. Quintana, Warden (Han, Chung) (Entered: 03/14/2011)
20 ORDER by Judge Christina A. Snyder, re Stipulation to Extend Time to Answer 18 . All Defendants have up to and including 4/28/2011 to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint. (vdr) (Entered: 03/15/2011)
21 Second STIPULATION for Extension of Time to File Answer to 5/31/2011 re Complaint − (Discovery), Complaint − (Discovery) 1 , Order, Order Extending Answer Due Deadline 20 filed by Defendants Harley G. Lappin, Robert E. MCFadden, Francisco J. Quintana, United States Bureau of Prisons. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Han, Chung) (Entered: 04/15/2011)
22 ORDER APPROVING SECOND STIPULATION 21 TO EXTEND TIME TO ANSWER OR OTHERWISE RESPOND TO COMPLAINT by Judge Christina A. Snyder. Defendants shall have up to and including 5/31/2011, to file their response. (vdr) (Entered: 04/18/2011)
23 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Case ;Memorandum of Points and Authorities; and Declarations of Mina Raskin, Corinne M. Nastro and Francisco J. Quintana in Support Thereof filed by Defendants Harley G. Lappin, Robert E. MCFadden, Francisco J. Quintana, United States Bureau of Prisons. Motion set for hearing on 7/11/2011 at 10:00 AM before Judge Christina A. Snyder. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order Granting Defendants' Motion to Dismiss)(Han, Chung) (Entered: 05/31/2011)
24 NOTICE OF MOTION AND Amended MOTION to Dismiss Case ; Memorandum of Points and Authorities; Declarations of Mina Raskin, Corinne M. Nastro ancisco and

Case: 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB As of: 01/30/2019 12:49 PM PST 7 of 19

06/08/2011
06/15/2011 06/15/2011 06/16/2011 06/16/2011 06/20/2011 06/27/2011 07/11/2011
07/13/2011
08/12/2011 08/15/2011 08/16/2011

Francisco J. Quintanta filed by Defendants Harley G. Lappin, Robert E. MCFadden, Francisco J. Quintana, United States Bureau of Prisons. Motion set for hearing on 7/11/2011 at 10:00 AM before Judge Christina A. Snyder. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order Granting Defendants' Motion to Dismiss)(Han, Chung) (Entered: 05/31/2011)
25 NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronically Filed Documents RE: Defendants' Amended Notice of Motion and Motion to Dismiss filed 5/31/2011 24 . The following error(s) was found: Incorrect event selected. The correct event is: Responses/Replies/Other Motion Related Documents − Amendment (Motion related). Filer used the Motions − Dismiss Case event, and created a duplicative motion entry for hearing on 7/11/2011. Clerk has removed this amended filing from the judge's calendar. In response to this notice the court may order (1) an amended or correct document to be filed (2) the document stricken or (3) take other action as the court deems appropriate. You need not take any action in response to this notice unless and until the court directs you to do so. (gk) (Entered: 06/09/2011)
26 APPLICATION for attorney Andrew E. Gelfand to Appear Pro Hac Vice(PHV Fee of $275 receipt number 0973−8802421 paid.) filed by Plaintiff David Bryant. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Culver, Rory) (Entered: 06/15/2011)
27 APPLICATION for attorney Deborah M. Golden to Appear Pro Hac Vice(PHV Fee of $275 receipt number 0973−8802665 paid.) filed by Plaintiff David Bryant. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Culver, Rory) (Entered: 06/15/2011)
28 ORDER by Judge Christina A. Snyder: granting 27 Application to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Attorney Deborah M. Golden on behalf of David Bryant, designating Adam S. Paris as local counsel. (lt) (Entered: 06/20/2011)
29 ORDER by Judge Christina A. Snyder: granting 26 Application to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Attorney Andrew E. Gelfand on behalf of David Bryant, designating Adam S. Paris as local counsel. (lt) (Entered: 06/20/2011)
30 MEMORANDUM in Opposition to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss filed by Plaintiff David Bryant. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Deborah M. Golden)(Culver, Rory) (Entered: 06/20/2011)
31 REPLY In Support Of MOTION to Dismiss Case ;Memorandum of Points and Authorities; and Declarations of Mina Raskin, Corinne M. Nastro and Francisco J. Quintana in Support Thereof 23 filed by Defendant United States Bureau of Prisons. (Han, Chung) (Entered: 06/27/2011)
32 MINUTES of hearing on Defendant United States Bureau of Prisons' Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint for Violations of the Rehabilitation Act and Violations of the First, Fifth, and Eighth Amendments 23 held before Judge Christina A. Snyder: Defendant's motion to dismiss is GRANTED with respect to plaintiff's first claim. Second, third, fourth, fifth and six claims are STAYED pending exhaustion of the first claim.Court Reporter: Laura Elias. (kpa) (Entered: 07/13/2011)
33 MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge Christina A. Snyder: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this action is hereby removed from this Court's active caseload until further application by the parties or order of this Court.IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that counsel shall file a joint report detailing the status of the case within 60 days and every quarter thereafter until the action has been reactivated on this Court's active caseload or a stipulation for dismissal is filed. (Made JS−6. Case Terminated.) (kpa) (Entered: 07/13/2011)
34 NOTICE OF APPEAL to the 9th CCA filed by Plaintiff David Bryant. Appeal of Order on Motion to Dismiss Case, Motion Hearing,, 32 (Appeal fee FEE NOT PAID.) (Culver, Rory) (Entered: 08/12/2011)
35 FILING FEE LETTER issued as to Plaintiff David Bryant re Notice of Appeal to 9th Circuit Court of Appeals 34 . (dmap) (Entered: 08/15/2011)
36 APPEAL FEE PAID: re Notice of Appeal to 9th Circuit Court of Appeals 34 as to Plaintiff David Bryant; Receipt Number: 0973−9075896 in the amount of $455. (dmap) (Entered: 08/16/2011)

Case: 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB As of: 01/30/2019 12:49 PM PST 8 of 19

08/16/2011 08/23/2011 09/12/2011 11/14/2011
12/06/2011 12/23/2011 03/30/2012 06/29/2012
06/29/2012 07/18/2012 07/20/2012 08/27/2012
09/06/2012 09/27/2012 10/29/2012

37 NOTIFICATION by Circuit Court of Appellate Docket Number 11−56371, 9th CCA regarding Notice of Appeal to 9th Circuit Court of Appeals 34 as to Plaintiff David Bryant. (lr) (Entered: 08/17/2011)
38 TRANSCRIPT DESIGNATION AND ORDERING FORM For Dates: 7/11/2011; Court Reporter: Laura M. Elias; Court of Appeals Case Number: 11−56371; Re: 34 (Culver, Rory) (Entered: 08/23/2011)
39 STATUS REPORT (Revised Joint Status Report) filed by Defendants Harley G. Lappin, Robert E. MCFadden, Francisco J. Quintana, United States Bureau of Prisons. (Han, Chung) (Entered: 09/12/2011)
40 ORDER from 9th CCA filed re: Notice of Appeal to 9th Circuit Court of Appeals 34 filed by David Bryant CCA # 11−56371. This appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Order received in this district on 11/14/2011. (dmap) (Entered: 11/17/2011)
41 MANDATE of 9th CCA filed re: Notice of Appeal to 9th Circuit Court of Appeals 34 CCA # 11−56371. The appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Mandate received in this district on 12/6/2011. (dmap) (Entered: 12/07/2011)
42 STATUS REPORT (JOINT) filed by Defendant United States Bureau of Prisons. (Han, Chung) (Entered: 12/23/2011)
43 STATUS REPORT Joint Status Report filed by Plaintiff David Bryant. (Paris, Adam) (Entered: 03/30/2012)
44 STATUS REPORT filed by Defendants Harley G. Lappin, Robert E. MCFadden, Francisco J. Quintana, United States Bureau of Prisons. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F, # 7 Exhibit G)(Han, Chung) (Entered: 06/29/2012)
45 STATUS REPORT filed by Plaintiff David Bryant. (Paris, Adam) (Entered: 06/29/2012)
46 RESPONSE filed by Defendants Harley G. Lappin, Robert E. MCFadden, Francisco J. Quintana, United States Bureau of Prisonsto Status Report, 44 , Status Report 45 (Han, Chung) (Entered: 07/18/2012)
47 MINUTE ORDER (IN CHAMBERS)SETTING STATUS CONFERENCE by Judge Christina A. Snyder. The parties shall appear before the Court for a Status Conference on Monday, 8/27/2012 at 11:00 A.M. (ys) (Entered: 07/23/2012)
48 MINUTES OF Status Conference held before Judge Christina A. Snyder: The Court confers with counsel and sets a Further Status Conference on 11/1/2012 12:00 PM before Judge Christina A. Snyder. Counsel are to meet and confer re: resolution of the communications issue prior to the next status conference. Court Reporter: Laura Elias. (gk) (Entered: 08/29/2012)
49 ORDER RE SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE by Magistrate Judge David T Bristow. Settlement Conference is placed on calendar for 10/29/2012 9:30AM. (ad) (Entered: 09/06/2012)
50 STATUS REPORT filed by Defendants Harley G. Lappin, Robert E. MCFadden, Francisco J. Quintana, United States Bureau of Prisons. (Han, Chung) (Entered: 09/27/2012)
51 MINUTES OF Settlement Conference held before Magistrate Judge David T Bristow: Following consultation with the Court, and after significant discussions between the Court and counsel, the parties were unable to agree upon a settlement. The Court encouraged counsel to continue to work towards a settlement, and offered to assist in any manner necessary. The Court recommended that the parties meet and confer in person within twenty days of todays conference and thereafter may hold any subsequent conferences via telephone. Further, the Court directed counsel to contact the clerk within 10 days of todays date to schedule a second settlement conference in approximately 60 days. Supplemental Confidential Settlement Briefs may be submitted no later than one day prior to the date of the next settlement conference.Court Recorder: RS−4 10−29−12. (am) (Entered: 10/31/2012)

Case: 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB As of: 01/30/2019 12:49 PM PST 9 of 19

11/01/2012 11/02/2012 12/21/2012 01/16/2013
01/22/2013 01/22/2013 01/23/2013
01/25/2013 03/26/2013 04/15/2013 04/17/2013 04/25/2013
05/03/2013
05/06/2013 05/14/2013

53 MINUTES OF Status Conference held before Judge Christina A. Snyder: The Court confers with counsel and sets a further Status Conference on January 28, 2013 at 1:15 p.m. Court Reporter: Mary Rickey. (im) (Entered: 11/02/2012)
52 SCHEDULING NOTICE IN CHAMBERS by Magistrate Judge David T Bristow SECOND Settlement Conference set for 1/16/2013 09:30 AM before Magistrate Judge David T Bristow. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY.(dts) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 11/02/2012)
54 STATUS REPORT filed by Defendant United States Bureau of Prisons. (Han, Chung) (Entered: 12/21/2012)
57 MINUTES OF SECOND SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE held before Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow: Following consultation with the Court, and after significant discussions between the Court and counsel, the parties were unable to agree upon a settlement, as the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) is continuing to investigate the viability of installing videophone technology at its Tuscon facility. If the government is unable to get a response regarding issue of the video phone, the settlement conference may be continued accordingly. Court Recorder: RS−4 10−29−12. (ad) (Entered: 01/23/2013)
55 STATUS REPORT filed by Plaintiff David Bryant. (Paris, Adam) (Entered: 01/22/2013)
56 Joint STIPULATION to Continue Status Conference from January 28, 2013 to April or May 2013 filed by Plaintiff David Bryant. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order Continuing January 28, 2013 Status Conference)(Paris, Adam) (Entered: 01/22/2013)
58 ORDER CONTINUING 1/28/2013 STATUS CONFERENCE by Judge Christina A. Snyder: Upon Stipulation 56 , IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows: The 1/28/2013 status conference in this matter is continued indefinitely and is to be rescheduled for a date in April or May 2013 that is after the parties' next mediation session and that is convenient to the Court. The parties will continue to update the Court in joint status reports filed on a quarterly basis as contemplated by this Court's 7/13/2011 Order. (gk) (Entered: 01/24/2013)
59 SCHEDULING NOTICE IN CHAMBERS by Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow Third Settlement Conference set for 5/1/2013 09:30 AM before Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY.(dts) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 01/25/2013)
60 STATUS REPORT JOINT filed by Plaintiff David Bryant. (Paris, Adam) (Entered: 03/26/2013)
61 Joint STIPULATION to Reschedule STATUS CONFERENCE FOR MAY 13, 2013 filed by PLAINTIFF David Bryant.(Paris, Adam) (Entered: 04/15/2013)
62 MINUTE ORDER (IN CHAMBERS) by Judge Christina A. Snyder. Pursuant to the parties' Joint Stipulation 61 to schedule Status Conference, the Court hereby sets the Status Conference for 5/13/2013 at 11:00 A.M. (ys) (Entered: 04/18/2013)
63 SCHEDULING NOTICE IN CHAMBERS by Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE previously scheduled for 5/1/13 9:30 A.M. has been rescheduled. Settlement Conference set for 5/16/2013 09:30 AM before Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY.(dts) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 04/25/2013)
64 Joint STIPULATION to Continue STATUS CONFERENCE from 5/13/2013 to 6/03/13 Re: Minutes of In Chambers Order/Directive − no proceeding held, Set/Reset Deadlines/Hearings 62 filed by Defendants Harley G. Lappin, Robert E. MCFadden, Francisco J. Quintana, United States Bureau of Prisons. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Han, Chung) (Entered: 05/03/2013)
65 ORDER SCHEDULING JUNE 3, 2013 STATUS CONFERENCE by Judge Christina A. Snyder 64 . The parties shall appear before the Court for a status conference in the above−captioned matter on June 3, 2013 at 11:00 a.m. (im) (Entered: 05/07/2013)
66 SCHEDULING NOTICE IN CHAMBERS by Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow Telephone Conference set for 5/15/2013 10:30 AM before Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS

Case: 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB As of: 01/30/2019 12:49 PM PST 10 of 19

05/15/2013 06/03/2013 06/17/2013 06/28/2013 07/08/2013 07/10/2013
08/05/2013 08/06/2013 08/19/2013 08/19/2013

ENTRY.(dts) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 05/14/2013)
67 MINUTES OF TELEPHONIC CONFERENCE held before Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow: The Court continued the third settlement conference currently set for May 16, 2013, for approximately thirty days in order for the defendants to obtain the necessary information. The parties shall agree upon a date and contact the clerk to schedule the third settlement conference. Court Recorder: RS−4 5−15−13. (ad) (Entered: 05/28/2013)
68 MINUTES OF Status Conference held before Judge Christina A. Snyder: The Court confers with counsel and counsel are still engaging in settlement discussions before Magistrate Judge Bristow. The Court sets a Further Status Conference on 8/12/2013 11:00 AM before Judge Christina A. Snyder. Court Reporter: Laura Elias. (gk) (Entered: 06/04/2013)
69 SCHEDULING NOTICE IN CHAMBERS by Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow Third Settlement Conference set for 7/15/2013 09:30 AM before Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY.(dts) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 06/17/2013)
70 STATUS REPORT filed by Plaintiff David Bryant. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Paris, Adam) (Entered: 06/28/2013)
71 SCHEDULING NOTICE IN CHAMBERS by Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow Telephone Conference set for 7/10/2013 03:00 PM before Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY.(dts) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 07/08/2013)
72 MINUTES OF TELEPHONIC CONFERENCE RE: SETTLEMENT held before Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow: A telephonic conference was held regarding the status of settlement. Attorneys Adam S. Paris, Andrew E. Gelfand, Rory Price Culver, and Matthew S. Fitzwater appeared on behalf of plaintiff. Assistant United States Attorneys Chung Hae Han and Monica L. Miller appeared on behalf defendants United States Bureau of Prisons, Harley G. Lappin, Robert E. McFadden and Francisco J. Quintana. Also present was Eliezer Ben Shmuel, United States Bureau of Prisons Supervising Attorney. The Court and counsel discussed the status of the case. It was determined that the settlement conference should not go forward at this time in order to allow plaintiffs counsel additional time to investigate the availability of a video remote interpreter service provider that would allow their interpreters to be recorded. The Court continued the settlement conference/status conference to August 19, 2013, at 9:30 a.m. Further, the Court ordered any supplemental briefing to be filed no later than August 13, 2013. Court Recorder: RS−3 07−410−13. (am) (Entered: 07/18/2013)
73 Joint STIPULATION to Reschedule STATUS CONFERENCE FOR SEPTEMBER 16, 2013 filed by Plaintiff David Bryant. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Paris, Adam) (Entered: 08/05/2013)
74 ORDER by Judge Christina A. Snyder Scheduling Status Conference on September 16, 2013. The parties shall appear before the Court for a status conference in the above−captioned matter on September 16, 2013 at 11:00 a.m. 73 (pso) (Entered: 08/07/2013)
75 MINUTES OF THIRD SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE held before Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow: The Court encouraged counsel to continue to work towards a settlement, and offered to continue to assist in the settlement process. The matter was continued to November 11, 2013, at 10:00am for a further status conference. Court Recorder: RS−4 08−19−13. (ad) (Entered: 08/21/2013)
76 AMENDED MINUTES THIRD SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE held before Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow re: The Court held a third settlement conference as previously scheduled. Attorneys Adam S. Paris and Rory Price Culver appeared on behalf of the plaintiff. Assistant United States Attorneys Chung Hae Han and Monica L. Miller appeared on behalf of defendants United States Bureau of Prisons, Harley G. Lappin, Robert E. McFadden, and Francisco J. Quintana. Also present was Eliezer Ben−Shmuel, United States Bureau of Prisons Supervising Attorney. Following consultation with the Court, and after significant discussions between the Court and counsel, the parties were unable to agree upon a settlement. The Court encouraged

Case: 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB As of: 01/30/2019 12:49 PM PST 11 of 19

09/06/2013 09/09/2013 09/27/2013 09/30/2013 09/30/2013
10/17/2013 10/21/2013 10/22/2013
11/04/2013 11/08/2013 12/02/2013

counsel to continue to work towards a settlement, and offered to continue to assist in the settlement process. The matter was continued to November 12, 2013, at 10:00 a.m. for a further status conference. 75 (am) (Entered: 08/27/2013)
77 Joint STIPULATION to Continue STATUS CONFERENCE from SEPTEMBER 16, 2013 to OCTOBER 7, 2013 Re: Order, Set/Reset Hearing 74 filed by PLAINTIFF David Bryant. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Paris, Adam) (Entered: 09/06/2013)
78 ORDER CONTINUING SEPTEMBER 16 STATUS CONFERENCE TO OCTOBER 7, 2013 by Judge Christina A. Snyder: Upon Stipulation 77 , IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the 9/16/2013 Status Conference is continued to 10/7/2013 11:00 AM before Judge Christina A. Snyder. (gk) (Entered: 09/10/2013)
79 EX PARTE APPLICATION to Stay pending October 7, 2013 Status Conference in the Event of Lapse of Appropriations re: Order, Set/Reset Hearing,, 78 filed by Defendants Harley G. Lappin, Robert E. MCFadden, Francisco J. Quintana, United States Bureau of Prisons. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Han, Chung) (Entered: 09/27/2013)
80 STATUS REPORT filed by Plaintiff David Bryant. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B)(Paris, Adam) (Entered: 09/30/2013)
81 ORDER GRANTING FEDERAL DEFENDANTS' CONDITIONAL EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR A STAY OF 10/7/2013 STATUS CONFERENCE IN THE EVENT OF LAPSE OF APPROPRIATIONS by Judge Christina A. Snyder: Upon the Federal Defendants' Ex Parte Application 79 , the Court hereby ORDERS that if a lapse in appropriations to the Department of Justice ("Department") begins at the end of the day on 9/30/2013, all dates, including the 10/7/2013, status conference, in this case shall be stayed. Counsel for Federal Defendants shall notify the Court as soon as Congress has appropriated funds for the Department and, at that point, all deadlines shall be extended commensurate with the duration of the lapse in appropriations. Should the lapse in appropriations continue on or after 10/7/2013, the Court will reschedule the status conference. In the event that the lapse in appropriations does not occur at the end of the day on 9/30/2013, the 10/7/2013, status conference shall remain on calendar. (gk) (Entered: 10/01/2013)
82 NOTICE of the Appropriation of Funds for the Department of Justice filed by Defendants United States Bureau of Prisons. (Han, Chung) (Entered: 10/17/2013)
83 Joint STIPULATION for Order TO SCHEDULE STATUS CONFERENCE FOR NOVEMBER 4, 2013 filed by Plaintiff David Bryant. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Paris, Adam) (Entered: 10/21/2013)
84 ORDER by Judge Christina A. Snyder: Pursuant to the Stipulation of the parties 83 , and good cause appearing therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows: (1) The stay entered by the Court in this action on September 30, 2013 is lifted, and all deadlines presently in effect in this action are extended by the number of days between September 30, 2013 and the date of this Order; and 2) The parties shall appear before the Court for a Status Conference in the above−captioned matter on 11/4/2013 at 11:00 AM before Judge Christina A. Snyder. (mg) (Entered: 10/23/2013)
85 MINUTES OF Further Status Conference held before Judge Christina A. Snyder: The Court confers with counsel regarding the status of the video relay service (VRS). Following discussion with counsel, the Court orders counsel to meet and confer and submit a stipulation and proposed order with regards to scheduling and future dates. Court Reporter: Lisa Gonzalez. (gk) (Entered: 11/07/2013)
86 SCHEDULING NOTICE IN CHAMBERS by Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow previously scheduled TELEPHONIC STATUS CONFERENCE for 11/12/13 10:00 a.m. has been rescheduled. Telephonic Status Conference set for 1/15/2014 10:00 AM before Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (dts) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 11/08/2013)
87 Joint STIPULATION to Lift Stay and Grant Plaintiff Leave to File an Amended Complaint filed by Plaintiff David Bryant. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Paris, Adam) (Entered: 12/02/2013)

Case: 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB As of: 01/30/2019 12:49 PM PST 12 of 19

12/03/2013
12/20/2013
12/29/2013 12/29/2013 01/15/2014 02/18/2014
03/17/2014 03/24/2014 03/26/2014 04/08/2014 04/09/2014

88 ORDER LIFTING STAY OF PROCEEDINGS AND GRANTING PLAINTIFF LEAVE TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT by Judge Christina A. Snyder: Upon Stipulation 87 , IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows: (1) The stay of this action entered by the Court on 7/11/2011 is lifted, and this action is restored to the Court's active docket; (2) Plaintiff David Bryant may file an amended and/or supplemented complaint by 12/20/2013; and (3) The Defendants shall have 60 days from the filing and service of the Amended Complaint to answer or otherwise respond. (Case reopened. MD JS−5.) (gk) (Entered: 12/04/2013)
89 FIRST AMENDED AND SUPPLEMENTED COMPLAINT against Defendants Federal Bureau of Prisons, Charles Samuels, Jr., and Juan Castillo; Party Francisco J. Quintana in his official capacity as Warden of USP Victorville, United States Bureau of Prisons, Harley G. Lappin in his official capacity as Director of the United States Bureau of Prisons, and Robert E. MCFadden in his official capacity as Regional Director of the United States Bureau of Prions Western Region terminated; amending Complaint 1 ; filed by Plaintiff David Bryant. (gk) (Additional attachment(s) added on 12/27/2013: # 1 Part 2, # 2 Part 3, # 3 Part 4) (gk). (Entered: 12/26/2013)
90 Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel: for attorney Rory Price Culver counsel for Plaintiff David Bryant. Timothea G.P. Letson is no longer attorney of record for the aforementioned party in this case for the reason indicated in the G−123 Notice. Filed by Plaintiff David Bryant. (Culver, Rory) (Entered: 12/29/2013)
91 Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel: for attorney Rory Price Culver counsel for Plaintiff David Bryant. Matthew S. Fitzwater is no longer attorney of record for the aforementioned party in this case for the reason indicated in the G−123 Notice. Filed by Plaintiff David Bryant. (Culver, Rory) (Entered: 12/29/2013)
92 MINUTES OF TELEPHONIC CONFERENCE RE: SETTLEMENT held before Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow: The Court and counsel discussed the status of the case. As plaintiff has filed a First Amended Complaint, a further settlement conference would not be fruitful at this time. The Court set a further telephonic conference on April 9, 2014, at 10:00am.Court Recorder: RS−4 01−15−14. (ad) (Entered: 01/17/2014)
93 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Change Venue to District of Arizona filed by Defendants Juan Castillo, Charles Samuels, Jr, United States Bureau of Prisons. Motion set for hearing on 4/7/2014 at 10:00 AM before Judge Christina A. Snyder. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit "A" (pp 22 − 28), # 2 Declaration of Theresa T. Talplacido, # 3 Exhibit "A", # 4 Exhibit "B', # 5 Exhibit "C", # 6 Exhibit "D", # 7 Exhibit "E", # 8 Exhibit "F", # 9 Exhibit "G", # 10 Proposed Order)(Han, Chung) (Entered: 02/18/2014)
94 MEMORANDUM in Opposition to MOTION to Change Venue to District of Arizona 93 filed by Plaintiff David Bryant. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of David Bryant, # 2 Declaration of Rory P. Culver, # 3 Exhibit 1, # 4 Exhibit 2, # 5 Exhibit 3)(Paris, Adam) (Entered: 03/17/2014)
95 REPLY in Support of MOTION to Change Venue to District of Arizona 93 filed by Defendants Juan Castillo, Charles Samuels, Jr, United States Bureau of Prisons. (Han, Chung) (Entered: 03/24/2014)
96 MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) by Judge Christina A. Snyder: The Court hereby DENIES defendants' Motion to Change Venue to District of Arizona 93 without prejudice. Court Reporter: Not Present. (gk) (Entered: 03/26/2014)
97 RE−SCHEDULING NOTICE by Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow previously scheduled for 04/09/2014 10:00 a.m. has been rescheduled. Telephone Conference set for 4/9/2014 01:00 PM before Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (dc) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 04/08/2014)
98 Further telephonic Status conference to be set by Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow. Status Conference set for 6/25/2014 10:00 AM before Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (dc) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 04/09/2014)

Case: 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB As of: 01/30/2019 12:49 PM PST 13 of 19

04/09/2014 04/09/2014
05/12/2014 05/19/2014 06/02/2014 06/05/2014
06/20/2014 06/25/2014
06/27/2014
06/27/2014 07/02/2014 07/25/2014

99 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Case Under FRCP 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) filed by Defendants Juan Castillo, Charles Samuels, Jr, United States Bureau of Prisons. Motion set for hearing on 6/2/2014 at 10:00 AM before Judge Christina A. Snyder. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order Granting Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Under FRCP 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6))(Han, Chung) (Entered: 04/09/2014)
100 MINUTES OF TELEPHONIC Status Conference held before Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow. Counsel advised the Court that the parties have further motion practice that they believe must first be concluded in order for any further settlement negotiations to be productive. Counsel indicated that the motions should be adjudicated by June 2014. Accordingly, the Court set a further telephonic conference on June 25, 2014, at 10:00 a.m. (dc) (Entered: 04/11/2014)
101 MEMORANDUM in Opposition to MOTION to Dismiss Case Under FRCP 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) 99 filed by Plaintiff David Bryant. (Paris, Adam) (Entered: 05/12/2014)
102 REPLY in Support of MOTION to Dismiss Case Under FRCP 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) 99 filed by Defendants Juan Castillo, Charles Samuels, Jr, United States Bureau of Prisons. (Han, Chung) (Entered: 05/19/2014)
103 MINUTES OF Motion Hearing held before Judge Christina A. Snyder: Defendants' Motion to Dismiss 99 is hereby DENIED. Defendants are directed to file an answer to the First Amended Complaint no later than 7/2/2014. Court Reporter: Laura Elias. (gk) (Entered: 06/03/2014)
104 TRANSCRIPT ORDER re: Order on Motion to Dismiss Case, Motion Hearing,, 103 , as to Defendants Juan Castillo, Charles Samuels, Jr, United States Bureau of Prisons DCN number: N80260. Court Reporter. Transcript portion requested: Other: 6/02/2014, Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. Transcript preparation will not begin until payment has been satisfied with the court reporter/recorder. (Han, Chung) (Entered: 06/05/2014)
105 SCHEDULING NOTICE by Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow Telephone Conference set for 6/25/2014 at 10:00 AM before Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow. Call−in Number: 213.894.0800 Meeting ID: 7002# User Password: 2021#.THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS TEXT ONLY ENTRY. (vp) (Entered: 06/20/2014)
109 MINUTES OF Telephone Conference held before Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow:, After discussing the status of the matter with counsel, the Court directedcounsel to confer and ascertain which claims (or portions thereof) have been resolved; the nature and forum of any such resolution; and the claims remaining in dispute. The Court set a further telephonic conference for August 12, 2014, at 10:00 a.m.Court Recorder: Court Smart. (dc) (Entered: 07/07/2014)
106 TRANSCRIPT for proceedings held on 06−02−14. Court Reporter/Electronic Court Recorder: Laura Elias, phone number 213−620−0890. Transcript may be viewed at the court public terminal or purchased through the Court Reporter/Electronic Court Recorder before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through PACER. Notice of Intent to Redact due within 7 days of this date. Redaction Request due 7/18/2014. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 7/28/2014. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 9/25/2014. (Elias, Laura) (Entered: 06/27/2014)
107 NOTICE OF FILING TRANSCRIPT filed for proceedings 06−02−14 re Transcript 106 THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (Elias, Laura) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 06/27/2014)
108 ANSWER to Amended Complaint,, 89 filed by Defendants Juan Castillo, Charles Samuels, Jr, United States Bureau of Prisons.(Han, Chung) (Entered: 07/02/2014)
110 STIPULATION to Continue Telephonic Status Conference from 8/12/2014 to 9/08/2014 at 10:00 a.m. Re: Telephone Conference, Set/Reset Deadlines/Hearings,, 109 filed by Defendants Juan Castillo, Federal Bureau of Prisons, Charles Samuels, Jr. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order to Continue Telephonic Status Conference)(Han, Chung) (Entered: 07/25/2014)

Case: 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB As of: 01/30/2019 12:49 PM PST 14 of 19

07/29/2014 08/22/2014 09/03/2014 09/08/2014 09/10/2014 09/29/2014 11/10/2014
12/01/2014 12/08/2014
03/06/2015 07/07/2015

111 ORDER APPROVING STIPULATION TO CONTINUE TELEPHONIC STATUS CONFERENCE by Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the parties' request to continue the further telephonic conference is GRANTED. The furthertelephonic conference currently scheduled for August 12, 2014, at 10:00 a.m. ishereby continued to September 8, 2014, at 10:00 a.m. (dc) (Entered: 07/30/2014)
112 ORDER SETTING SCHEDULING CONFERENCE by Judge Christina A. Snyder. Scheduling Conference set for 12/8/2014 at 11:00 AM before Judge Christina A. Snyder. (cj) (Entered: 08/22/2014)
113 SCHEDULING NOTICE: Telephone Conference set for 9/8/2014 10:00 AM before Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow. Call−in Number: 213.894.0800. Please follow the prompts and enter the codes below.Meeting ID: 1114# User Password: 6146#THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (dc) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 09/03/2014)
115 MINUTES OF Telephone Conference held before Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow. Counsel indicated that they had conferred as to the issues remaining in dispute, and believed that a further settlement conference would be productive. The Court directed the Clerk to coordinate with counsel for purposes of scheduling a further settlement conference.Court Recorder: Court Smart. (dc) (Entered: 09/15/2014)
114 ORDER RE SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE Settlement Conference set for 11/10/2014 09:30 AM before Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow. (dc) (Entered: 09/10/2014)
116 Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel: for attorney Rory Price Culver counsel for Plaintiff David Bryant. Andrew E. Gelfand is no longer attorney of record for the aforementioned party in this case for the reason indicated in the G−123 Notice. Filed by Plaintiff David Bryant. (Culver, Rory) (Entered: 09/29/2014)
117 MINUTES OF Settlement Conference held before Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow. Following consultation with the Court, and after significantdiscussions between the Court and counsel, the parties arrived at a possible mechanism for reaching a settlement. Counsel for defendant indicated that they would prepare a proposed revised order for the complaint adjudication officer, and would forward such to plaintiff's counsel within 10 days. Plaintiffs counsel would then forward any revisions to defense counsel within 10 days of receipt, and counsel is to advise Judge Snyder of the status of any potential settlement at the December 8, 2014, scheduling conference.Court Recorder: Court Smart. (dc) (Entered: 11/25/2014)
118 JOINT REPORT Rule 26(f) Discovery Plan ; estimated length of trial 7 days, filed by Plaintiff David Bryant.. (Paris, Adam) (Entered: 12/01/2014)
119 MINUTES OF SCHEDULING CONFERENCE held before Judge Christina A. Snyder. The Court confers with counsel and schedules the following dates: Request for leave to file amended pleadings or to add parties: April 1, 2015; Factual Discovery Cut−off: November 2, 2015; Last Day to File Motions: February 18, 2016; Exchange of Expert Reports Cut−off: November 2, 2015; Exchange of Rebuttal Reports Cut−off: December 15, 2015; Expert Discovery Cut−off: January 19, 2016; Last Day to File Motions In Limine: March 8, 2016; Pretrial Conference/Hearing on Motions in Limine (11:00 A.M.): April 18, 2016; and Jury Trial (9:30 A.M.): May 10, 2016. Motions in limine shall be noticed for the same date and time of the Pretrial Conference, and filed 28 days prior thereto, unless otherwise specified. Motions in limine/oppositions shall not exceed five (5) pages in length and no replies will be accepted. Counsel inform the court of the parties' preference to go before the Magistrate Judge assigned for settlement purposes. Counsel shall contact Judge Bristow's Courtroom Deputy Clerk regarding availability. Court Reporter: Anne Kielwasser. (lom) (Entered: 12/15/2014)
120 Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel: for attorney Rory Price Culver counsel for Plaintiff David Bryant. Rory P. Culver is no longer attorney of record for the aforementioned party in this case for the reason indicated in the G−123 Notice. Filed by Plaintiff David Bryant. (Culver, Rory) (Entered: 03/06/2015)
121 APPLICATION for attorney Adam M. Shapiro to Appear Pro Hac Vice (PHV Fee of $325 receipt number 0973−16038153 paid.) filed by Plaintiff David Bryant. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Attorney Lauren J McGrory added to party David

Case: 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB As of: 01/30/2019 12:49 PM PST 15 of 19

07/07/2015 07/08/2015 07/08/2015 08/20/2015 08/20/2015
09/02/2015 09/04/2015 09/08/2015 09/09/2015
10/14/2015
10/20/2015 10/22/2015 10/26/2015

Bryant(pty:pla)) (McGrory, Lauren) (Entered: 07/07/2015)
122 APPLICATION for attorney Lauren R. Mendolera to Appear Pro Hac Vice (PHV Fee of $325 receipt number 0973−16038432 paid.) filed by Plaintiff David Bryant. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (McGrory, Lauren) (Entered: 07/07/2015)
123 ORDER ON APPLICATION OF NON−RESIDENT ATTORNEY TO APPEAR IN A SPECIFIC CASE PRO HAC VICE by Judge Christina A. Snyder: granting 122 APPLICATION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Attorney Lauren R. Mendolera on behalf of Plaintiff, designating Lauren J. McGrory as local counsel. (lt) (Entered: 07/09/2015)
124 ORDER ON APPLICATION OF NON−RESIDENT ATTORNEY TO APPEAR IN A SPECIFIC CASE PRO HAC VICE by Judge Christina A. Snyder: granting 121 APPLICATION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Attorney Adam M. Shapiro on behalf of Plaintiff, designating Lauren J. McGrory as local counsel. (lt) (Entered: 07/09/2015)
125 APPLICATION for attorney JAMIE L. KRINGSTEIN to Appear Pro Hac Vice (PHV Fee of $325 receipt number 0973−16301530 paid.) filed by PLAINTIFF David Bryant. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (McGrory, Lauren) (Entered: 08/20/2015)
126 ORDER ON APPLICATION OF NON−RESIDENT ATTORNEY TO APPEAR IN A SPECIFIC CASE PRO HACE VICE by Judge Christina A. Snyder: granting 125 APPLICATION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Attorney Jamie L Kringstein on behalf of David Bryant, designating Lauren J. McGrory as local counsel. (lom) (Entered: 08/21/2015)
127 APPLICATION for attorney Megan R. O'Flynn to Appear Pro Hac Vice (PHV Fee of $325 receipt number 0973−16374378 paid.) filed by Plaintiff David Bryant. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Paris, Adam) (Entered: 09/02/2015)
128 APPLICATION for attorney ANDREW L. VAN HOUTER to Appear Pro Hac Vice (PHV Fee of $325 receipt number 0973−16395092 paid.) filed by PLAINTIFF David Bryant. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Paris, Adam) (Entered: 09/04/2015)
129 ORDER ON APPLICATION OF NON−RESIDENT ATTORNEY TO APPEAR IN A SPECIFIC CASE PRO HAC VICE by Judge Christina A. Snyder: granting 127 APPLICATION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Attorney Megan R. O'Flynn on behalf of Plaintiff, designating Adam S. Paris as local counsel. (lt) (Entered: 09/10/2015)
130 ORDER ON APPLICATION OF NON−RESIDENT ATTORNEY TO APPEAR IN A SPECIFIC CASE PRO HAC VICE by Judge Christina A. Snyder: granting 128 APPLICATION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Attorney Andrew L. Van Houter on behalf of Plaintiff, designating Adam S. Paris as local counsel. (lt) (Entered: 09/10/2015)
131 EX PARTE APPLICATION for Order for to Take Depositions of Federal Inmates David Bryant and Carl Courtright Memorandum of Points and Authorities, Declaration of Chung H. Han in Support Thereof filed by Defendants Juan Castillo, Charles Samuels, Jr, United States Bureau of Prisons. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order Granting Defendants' Ex Parte Application to Take Depositions of Federal Inmates David Bryant and Carl Courtright under FRCP 30(a)(2)(B)) (Han, Chung) (Entered: 10/14/2015)
132 JOINDER in EX PARTE APPLICATION for Order for to Take Depositions of Federal Inmates David Bryant and Carl Courtright Memorandum of Points and Authorities, Declaration of Chung H. Han in Support Thereof 131 filed by Plaintiff David Bryant. (Paris, Adam) (Entered: 10/20/2015)
133 Joint STIPULATION to Reschedule DISCOVERY DEADLINES filed by Plaintiff David Bryant. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Paris, Adam) (Entered: 10/22/2015)
134 ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' EX PARTE APPLICATION TO TAKE DEPOSITIONS OF FEDERALINMATES DAVID BRYANT AND CARL COURTRIGHT UNDER FED. R. CIV. P. 30(a)(2)(B) by Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow: 131 EX PARTE APPLICATION for Order (SEE ORDER FOR DETAILS) (dc) (Entered: 10/26/2015)

Case: 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB As of: 01/30/2019 12:49 PM PST 16 of 19

11/02/2015 11/05/2015 11/12/2015 11/16/2015
12/04/2015 12/07/2015
12/07/2015 12/09/2015
12/23/2015 01/07/2016 01/26/2016

135 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Compel Production of Documents filed by Plaintiff David Bryant. Motion set for hearing on 12/3/2015 at 10:00 AM before Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow. (Attachments: # 1 Joint Stipulation, # 2 Declaration of Brian R. England, # 3 Declaration of Monica L. Miller)(Paris, Adam) (Entered: 11/02/2015)
136 MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) by Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow: 135 Motion to Compel. As the discovery cut−off date was November 2, 2015, the Court hereby DENIES the Motion as the same is untimely filed. (dc) (Entered: 11/05/2015)
138 MINUTES OF Telephone Conference held before Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow.The Court and counsel discussed the issue relating to a deposition and document subpoena served on a third party in Iowa. Following the discussion, the Court proposed a solution to counsel, and encouraged counsel to further discuss the issue in an attempt to reach an agreement.Court Recorder: Court Smart. (dc) (Entered: 11/17/2015)
137 ORDER GRANTING STIPULATION REVISING EXPERT DISCOVERY DEADLINES by Judge Christina A. Snyder.: Upon Stipulation 133 , the Court orders as follows: (1) The depositions of Mark County, Jessica Serrato and the 30(b)(6) designees are continued to 11/17/2015 − 11/19/2015; (2) The depositions of Carl Courtright, David Bryant and any remaining agreed upon 30(b)(6) designees, and site visit to USP Tucson are continued to 12/2/2015 − 12/4/2015; (3) The initial expert reports are continued to 12/16/2015; (4) The rebuttal expert reports are continued to 1/15/2016; and (5) The expert discovery cut−off is continued to 2/15/2016. (gk) (Entered: 11/16/2015)
139 SCHEDULING NOTICE: Settlement Conference set for 1/7/2016 09:30 AM before Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow. Counsel is reminded that updated settlement brief positions are due no later than 7 days before settlement date.THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (dc) (Entered: 12/04/2015)
140 MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS ORDER RE SECOND SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE by Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow. A second settlement conference is placed on calendar for January 7, 2016, at 9:30 a.m. in Courtroom 3 of the United States District Court, Eastern Division, Riverside Courthouse, in Riverside, California. No later than 4:00 p.m. five (5) court days prior thereto, each party shall submit an updated letter brief, detailing previous settlement discussions, including all offers and counter−offers, as well as a procedural history of this action since the initial settlement conference and the party's settlementpositions. (dc) (Entered: 12/07/2015)
141 STIPULATION to Continue Pretrial and Trial Dates from April 18th, 2016 and May 10, 2016 to July 18th, 2016 and August 16th filed by Defendants Juan Castillo, Federal Bureau of Prisons, Charles Samuels, Jr. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Miller, Monica) (Entered: 12/07/2015)
142 ORDER ON STIPULATION TO CONTINUE PRETRIAL AND TRIAL DATES by Judge Christina A. Snyder. Pursuant to the parties' Stipulation to Continue Pretrial and Trial Dates 141 , for good cause shown, the Court grants the parties' request and orders that the currently scheduled deadlines and dates be continued as follows: Pre−Trial Conference/Motions Hearing set for July 18, 2016 at 11:00 am; Jury Trial set for August 16, 2016 at 9:30 am. (SEE ORDER FOR FURTHER DETAILS) (iv) (Entered: 12/09/2015)
143 Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel: for attorney Adam S Paris counsel for Plaintiff David Bryant. Andrew L. Van Houter is no longer counsel of record for the aforementioned party in this case for the reason indicated in the G−123 Notice. Filed by Plaintiff David Bryant. (Paris, Adam) (Entered: 12/23/2015)
144 MINUTES OF FIFTH SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE held before Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow. The Court set a further telephone status conference for Tuesday, January, 26, 2016 at 10:00 a.m. to determine the results and implication of the BOPs recent Request For Information.Court Recorder: Court Smart. (dc) (Entered: 01/08/2016)
145 MINUTES OF TELEPHONIC STATUS CONFERENCE RE: SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE held before Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow.The Court set a briefing scheduling as to the outstanding issues regarding attorney fees and the form of

Case: 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB As of: 01/30/2019 12:49 PM PST 17 of 19

02/04/2016 02/09/2016
02/17/2016 04/01/2016 04/21/2016 04/25/2016 04/28/2016
05/26/2016

any potential settlement agreement. The simultaneous initial briefs are due by March 15, 2016 and responses are due by March 29, 2016. The Court also set a further telephonic status conference for April 1, 2016 at 10:00 a.m., to discuss the remaining settlement issues, including the anticipated request for proposal regarding the VRS system at FCC−Tucson.Court Recorder: Court Smart. (dc) (Entered: 01/29/2016)
146 STIPULATION to Continue Pretrial and Trial Dates Re: Order,, Set/Reset Deadlines/Hearings, 142 filed by Plaintiff David Bryant. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Paris, Adam) (Entered: 02/04/2016)
147 ORDER GRANTING STIPULATION TO CONTINUE PRETRIAL AND TRIAL DATES by Judge Christina A. Snyder: Upon Stipulation 146 , the Court orders that the currently scheduled deadlines and dates be continued as follows: Depositions of Warden J.T. Shartle, Plaintiff David Bryant, and Advanced Technologies Group, LLC 5/4/2016. Initial Expert Disclosures and Reports 5/16/2016. Rebuttal Expert Disclosures and Reports 6/14/2016. Expert Discovery Cut−Off; Motion Cut−Off 7/18/2016. Final Settlement Conference 8/15/2016. Motions in Limine Filing Cut−Off 8/22/2016. Oppositions due no later than 8/29/2016. No replies will be accepted. Pre−Trial Conference/Motions Hearing set for 9/12/2016 11:00 AM before Judge Christina A. Snyder. Jury Trial set for 10/18/2016 09:30 AM before Judge Christina A. Snyder. (gk) (Entered: 02/11/2016)
148 Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel: for attorney Adam S Paris counsel for Plaintiff David Bryant. Lauren J. McGrory is no longer counsel of record for the aforementioned party in this case for the reason indicated in the G−123 Notice. Filed by Plaintiff David Bryant. (Paris, Adam) (Entered: 02/17/2016)
149 MINUTES OF TELEPHONIC STATUS CONFERENCE RE: SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE held before Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow. Following discussion between the court and counsel, counsel were instructed to further meet and confer to discuss what settlement will entail. Counsel are to inform the court what terms have been agreed upon and what issues remain. A further status conference was set for Thursday, April 21, 2016 at 11:00 a.m. for purposes of discussing settlement in this matter.Court Recorder: Court Smart. (dc) (Entered: 04/05/2016)
151 MINUTES OF TELEPHONIC STATUS CONFERENCE RE: SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE held before Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow. The Court ordered counsel to continue to meet and confer to discuss the remaining settlement issues. In the event that the District Judges scheduling order needs to be modified, the Court informed the parties that such request must be made to District Judge Snyder. A further status conference was set for Thursday, May 26, 2016 at 10:00 a.m. for purposes of determining the settlement status.Court Recorder: Court Smart. (dc) (Entered: 04/27/2016)
150 STIPULATION to Continue Pretrial and Trial Dates from October 18, 2016 to December 13, 2016 Re: Order,,,, Set/Reset Deadlines/Hearings,,, 147 filed by Plaintiff David Bryant. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Paris, Adam) (Entered: 04/25/2016)
152 ORDER GRANTING STIPULATION TO CONTINUE PRETRIAL AND TRIAL DATES by Judge Christina A. Snyder. WHEREAS, Plaintiff David Bryant and Defendants Federal Bureau of Prisons, Charles Samuels, Jr., and Juan Castillo, having filed their Joint Stipulation to Continue Pretrial and Trial Dates 150 (the Stipulation); AND GOOD CAUSE being shown hereby GRANTS the Stipulation and orders that the currently scheduled deadlines and dates be continued as follows: July 6, 2016 Depositions of Warden J.T. Shartle, Plaintiff David Bryant, and Advanced Technologies Group, LLC; July 15, 2016 Initial Expert Disclosures and Reports; August 12, 2016 Rebuttal Expert Disclosures and Reports; September 16, 2016 Expert Discovery Cut−Off; Motion Cut−Off; October 17, 2016 Final Settlement Conference; October 21, 2016 Motions in Limine Filing Cut−Off; November 14, 2016 at 11:00 a.m. Pretrial Conference/Motions hearing; December 13, 2016 at 9:30 a.m. Jury Trial. IT IS SO ORDERED. (clee) (Entered: 04/28/2016)
153 MINUTES OF TELEPHONIC STATUS CONFERENCE RE: SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE held before Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow. Court ordered counsel to further meet and confer, in person, to discuss the remaining settlement issues. The Court also indicated that it was willing to entertain the possibility of a further settlement conference, to the extent such was warranted. Court set a further

Case: 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB As of: 01/30/2019 12:49 PM PST 18 of 19

06/06/2016 06/21/2016 07/07/2016
07/26/2016 08/02/2016
08/03/2016
09/12/2016 09/21/2016 09/21/2016

status conference for Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 10:00 a.m. The parties are expected to have conferred prior to that date. See Order for details. Court Recorder: Court Smart RS−3. (vp) (Entered: 06/02/2016)
154 SCHEDULING TELEPHONIC HEARING NOTICE: Re: Settlement Conference. Telephone Conference set for 6/21/2016 10:00 AM before Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow. Please dial the telephone number below during the reservation date and time. Call−in Number:213.894.0800. Please follow the prompts and enter the codes below. Meeting ID: 7002# User Password: 5760#. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS TEXT ONLY ENTRY. (vp) (Entered: 06/06/2016)
155 MINUTES OF Telephonic Status Conference held before Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow. Following discussion between the Court and counsel, a further settlement conference was scheduled for Wednesday, July 6, 2016 at 10:00 a.m. Settlement briefs are to be delivered to chambers no later than Thursday, June 30, 2016. Court Recorder: Court Smart RS#3. (iva) (Entered: 06/24/2016)
156 MINUTES OF SIXTH Settlement Conference held before Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow: Following consultation with the Court, and after significant discussions between the Court and counsel, the parties were unable to reach terms of a settlement. Counsel Mr. Paris for plaintiffs and Ms. Han for defendants are to further meet and confer to discuss settlement issues and discuss whether a final settlement would be beneficial. Counsel are to contact the Courtroom Clerk to provide the outcome of their meet and confer and to notify the Court whether further involvement is necessary. Court Recorder: Court Smart. (dc) (Entered: 07/11/2016)
157 STIPULATION to Continue filed by Defendants United States Bureau of Prisons. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Han, Chung) (Entered: 07/26/2016)
158 ORDER APPROVING STIPULATION FOR PERMISSION TO ATTEND SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE BEFORE MAGISTRATE JUDGE JAY C. GANDHI, AND TO CONTINUE PRETRIAL AND TRIAL DATES by Judge Christina A. Snyder. The Court has reviewed the stipulation submitted by counsel for plaintiff David Bryant and defendants Federal Bureau of Prisons, et al. 157 . For GOOD CAUSE shown, the Court hereby APPROVES the Stipulation: Pretrial Conference/Motions Hearing set for 1/23/2017 at 11:00 AM. Jury Trial set for 2/21/2017 at 9:30 AM before Judge Christina A. Snyder. SEE ORDER FOR DETAILS. (iv) (Entered: 08/03/2016)
159 (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER REGARDING SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE by Magistrate Judge Jay C. Gandhi. IT IS ORDERED as follows: The parties and their lead trial counsel shall appear for a settlement conference on September 12, 2016 at 10:00 a.m., in Courtroom 6A of the Ronald Reagan Federal Building and U.S. Courthouse, 411 West Fourth Street, 6th Floor, Santa Ana, California 92701. The parties and their lead trial counsel shall keep their schedule clear for the remaining part of the day. No party or counsel shall be excused absent leave from the Judge or until the settlement conference is adjourned. On or before September 6, 2016 at 12:00 noon, each party shall submit a confidential mediation statement (or email) directly to the chambers of the Court at judge_gandhi_mediation@cacd.uscourts.gov. The Statements should not be filed with the Clerk of the Court, and they will not be made part of the case file. (kh) (Entered: 08/03/2016)
165 MINUTES OF Settlement Conference held before Magistrate Judge Jay C. Gandhi: The matter came on for a Settlement Conference. The parties and their lead counsel were present. The Court dispensed with a joint session. The Court privately caucused with the parties and their lead counsel. The Court engaged in post−mediation calls with counsel. The matter is now resolved in its entirety. Court Recorder: CS 9/12/2016. (kh) (Entered: 10/17/2016)
160 Joint STIPULATION to Continue Expert Report Deadlines from 09/23/2016 to 10/14/2016 filed by Plaintiff David Bryant. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Paris, Adam) (Entered: 09/21/2016)
161 NOTICE OF ERRATA filed by Plaintiff David Bryant. correcting Stipulation to Continue 160 [Proposed] Order Dkt. #160−1 ONLY (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Paris, Adam) (Entered: 09/21/2016)

Case: 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB As of: 01/30/2019 12:49 PM PST 19 of 19

09/26/2016 09/27/2016 09/29/2016 10/17/2016 10/19/2016
12/09/2016 12/19/2016 02/17/2017 03/07/2017 03/08/2017

162 STIPULATION for Protective Order filed by Defendants Juan Castillo, Federal Bureau of Prisons, Charles Samuels, Jr. (Attachments: # 1 [Proposed] Protective Order)(Miller, Monica) (Entered: 09/26/2016)
163 ORDER GRANTING JOINT STIPULATION TO CONTINUE EXPERT REPORT DEADLINES by Judge Christina A. Snyder: Upon Stipulation 160 , the Court orders that the currently scheduled deadlines and dates be continued as follows: Initial Expert Disclosures and Report due 10/14/2016. Rebuttal Expert Disclosures and Report due 11/14/2016. (gk) (Entered: 09/29/2016)
164 PROTECTIVE ORDER by Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow re Stipulation for Protective Order 162 . Upon consideration of the parties Stipulation for Protective Order and for good cause shown, the Court GRANTS the parties request. The Court hereby enters this Stipulated Protective Order in the above−captioned case. See Order for details. (vp) (Entered: 09/29/2016)
166 STATUS REPORT ON SETTLEMENT filed by Plaintiff David Bryant. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Paris, Adam) (Entered: 10/17/2016)
167 MINUTE ORDER (IN CHAMBERS) − JOINT STATUS REPORT ONSETTLEMENT 166 by Judge Christina A. Snyder. THE COURT, having been notified by Magistrate Judge Jay C. Gandhi that the above−entitled action has been settled on or about September 12, 2016, and the Joint Status Report on Settlement filed; IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this action is hereby removed from this Court's active caseload until further application by the parties or order of this Court. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that counsel shall file a proper stipulation for dismissal or a joint report detailing settlement status within 60 days and every quarter thereafter until a stipulation for dismissal is filed.(Made JS−6. Case Terminated.) (lom) (Entered: 10/19/2016)
168 Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel: for attorney Chung Hae Han counsel for Defendants Juan Castillo, Federal Bureau of Prisons, Charles Samuels, Jr. Chung H. Han is no longer counsel of record for the aforementioned party in this case for the reason indicated in the G−123 Notice. Filed by Defendants Federal Bureau of Prisons, Charles Samuels, Jr., Juan Castillo. (Han, Chung) (Entered: 12/09/2016)
169 STATUS REPORT ON SETTLEMENT filed by Plaintiff David Bryant. (Paris, Adam) (Entered: 12/19/2016)
170 STATUS REPORT (Joint ) Regarding Settlement filed by Defendants Juan Castillo, Federal Bureau of Prisons, Charles Samuels, Jr. (Miller, Monica) (Entered: 02/17/2017)
171 NOTICE OF LODGING filed of the [Proposed] Order of Dismissal re Status Report 170 (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Miller, Monica) (Entered: 03/07/2017)
172 ORDER OF DISMISSAL 171 by Judge Christina A. Snyder. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 1. Plaintiff's action is dismissed with prejudice in its entirety; 2. Each party shall bear its or their own costs of suit and fees. (lom) (Entered: 03/08/2017)

 
 Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 1 of 372 Page ID #:4
•••••

1 ~AaDriAsMa@Ssu. lPlAcRrot.:m>.c(SomBN 190693)

4320TLc1Ru8eoll8s.vY :8AercnPre@glel.!sUlCeufslUYl,(c3LCrP1oVaa0mlrEi)kf.Roc7Eor1(nam2Ssi-atB6, 96NS00u002i6t7e712816080)

Fax:

(310) 712-8800

5

;,J,''

FILED ClERK U.S. DISTRICT COURT

,;

d\N- 7 2011

·~ Cl-=ENT:o:::RAl=-=Dl=sr=RIC=TOf=CA=l~IFO=RN~IA

' BY

DEPUTY

6 7

WDWD11eEaabDsBsohhuOrmmpaRohggAnttootGHnnCo, LGilDrdacOeC~lneLe@,Dr2N0swE.0'WaN3sCof?(ioplSamrowurir.thoueart4tgce0ev0ifcoeraCpipvliilcRatiigohntsfoarnthdcUomrbianng)Affairs

8 Tel.:

(202) 319-1000

Fax:

(202) 319-1010

9

10 [Additional Counsel Listed on Signature Page]

11 Attorneys for PlaintiffDavid Bryant

12

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

13

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

14 DAVID BRYANT,
15

MRP (D Bx)
0254·~

AFACOIMNOFRSEDMT!'~HVP)u,LEI.OMA.R.LEI,ENA.NHFTTtIA~IFSOBAONINRLSDIVTOEIAFOITGTLIHHAOTTENHIOANCST

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 2 of 372 Page ID #:5

1

David Bryant ("Bryant"), by his undersigned counsel, for his complaint

2 against defendants the United States Bureau of Prisons (the "BOP"), Harley G.

3 Lappin, Robert E. McFadden and Francisco J. Quintana (collectively

4 "Defendants"), alleges as follows:

5

NATURE OF THE ACTION

6

1. This lawsuit arises from Defendants' failure to provide auxiliary aids

7 to allow effective communication, as required by federal law and the United States

8 Constitution, to Bryant, a deaf man in Defendants' custody at United States

9 Penitentiary ("USP") Victorville.

10

2. Bryant has severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss in his left ear

11 and profound sensorineural hearing loss in his right ear. In his right ear, Bryant

12 cannot hear any sound. In his left ear, Bryant can hear some very loud noises.

13 With the use of hearing aids, which Bryant needs to wear daily, Bryant can hear

14 very little noise in his right ear and some noise in his left ear. If there is no

15 background noise and no interference from his hearing aids, Bryant can

16 occasionally hear a word spoken loudly in his left ear. Generally, however, he is

17 unable to hear any spoken words even with the use of the hearing aids and, under

18 no circumstances, can he hear or understand spoken conversation. Instead, the

19 hearing aids enable Bryant to better sense his surroundings by hearing noise or

20 loud sounds. Furthermore, the hearing aids do not work properly unless Bryant

21 receives new hearing aid batteries when the old batteries weaken or die. Bryant

22 currently uses Phonak PowerMAXX 411 hearing aids. With this hearing aid

23 model, new batteries typically weaken or die within a few days to a few weeks and

24 must be replaced in order for the hearing aids to function.

25

3. Bryant's primary and native language is American Sign Language

26 ("ASL"). ASL is a complex language that employs signs made with the hands,

27 facial expressions and body language. ASL is a language distinct and different

28

-1-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 3 of 372 Page ID #:6

1 from English-it is not simply English in hand signals. ASL has its own 2 vocabulary and its own rules for grammar and syntax.

3

4. English is a second language for Bryant. As a result, Bryant's English

4 reading and writing skill level is much lower than that of a hearing person of

5 similar education. Bryant is functionally illiterate, and for this reason reading and

6 writing do not provide an effective method of communication for Bryant.

7

5. Bryant's ability to lip-read is extremely limited and even less effective

8 than written communication. In general, it is extremely difficult to lip-read

9 English because only a small fraction of the sounds used in speaking are clearly

10 visible on the mouth and many sounds appear identical on the lips. In addition to

11 the difficulties in lip-reading, the ability to accurately lip-read is affected by the

12 speaker's facial bone structure, facial musculature, facial hair, lighting and other

13 external factors. Moreover, even if Bryant were able to lip-read, he would not

14 necessarily understand the English language or the vocabulary the speaker was

15 usmg.

16

6. For these reasons and others, Bryant does not understand or

17 communicate effectively in written or spoken English. Instead, Bryant requires a

18 qualified ASL interpreter to communicate effectively with persons who do not

19 know and use ASL.

20

7. Furthermore, Bryant cannot use the telephone in the same way as a

21 hearing person, and requires either a telecommunication device for the deaf

22 ("TDD" or "TTY") or a videophone.

23

8. A TTY allows people to send written messages back and forth to each

24 other by telephone. When both users have TTYs, they can communicate directly

25 over telephone lines. When one person does not have a TTY, a

26 Telecommunications Relay Service ("TRS") operator reads aloud the written 27 messages from the TTY user and transcribes the non-TTY user's verbal response. 28 Though a TTY is a helpful communication tool, it ultimately relies on the user's

-2-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 4 of 372 Page ID #:7

1 ability to communicate in written English and, in all events, is a much more time2 intensive communication tool than the telephone. The TTY is 60-year-old 3 technology, and has been for the most part supplanted by the videophone. Most 4 deaf individuals no longer have TTYs, and communicate on telephone solely by 5 videophone.

6

9. A videophone is a telephone with a camera and screen for visual, real-

7 time communication. Thus, a videophone is a far more effective auxiliary aid for

8 deaf individuals like Bryant who use ASL as a primary means of communication,

9 both because it depends upon ASL skills instead of written skills for

10 communication, and because without a videophone there is no way to contact most

11 deaf individuals outside the prison system who no longer own TTYs. Like the

12 TRS system, there is now a Video Relay Service ("VRS"), so that communication

13 can be accomplished by videophone between an ASL user and a hearing, non-ASL

14 user through a relay operator who is a qualified ASL interpreter. However, under

15 the current system one cannot place a call from a TTY to a videophone through

16 any relay service.

17

10. Defendants continually have failed to provide Bryant with a qualified

18 ASL interpreter and other reasonable auxiliary aids and services resulting in Bryant

19 being:

20 21

•

unable to communicate effectively with health and mental health professionals, raise medical

care providers issues, discuss

mental health concerns, or understand the treatments and

22

medications they prescribe;

23

•

aenxpcluredheadbfilriotmatiopnarctilcaispsaetsinagndinwthoerksapmroegreadmucsaatsiohneaal,rivnogcational

24

pnsoners;

25

•

deQrived of knowledge or understanding anO/or emergency announcements;

of

prison-wide

safety

26

• deprived of knowledge or understanding of prison counts,

27

meals and other important daily prison activities;

28

•

unable to communicate effectively ("COs") and other prison staff;

with

correctional

officers

-3-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 5 of 372 Page ID #:8

1

• subject to disciplinary action stemming from Defendants' refUsal to accommodate his deafness;

2

• unable to communicate effectively during such disciplinary

3

action hearings;

4

•

attacked by other captioning on the

inmates for attempting to television in his unit; and

activate

closed-

5

• prevented from contacting family, friends and his attorneys.

6

11. Bryant officially informed Defendants of their failure to provide

7 proper and effective communication and the resulting problems by using the

8 BOP's administrative remedy process and through letters from his counsel. More 9 generally, Bryant's struggles as a deaf prisoner serve as daily requests for aid.

10 Defendants denied Bryant's administrative remedy requests and his near-daily

11 informal requests for auxiliary aids and services making this lawsuit necessary.

12 Additionally, Bryant has been transferred twice in retaliation for seeking the

13 needed auxiliary aids through the BOP's administrative remedy process, further

14 necessitating this lawsuit.

15

12. Bryant now seeks from the Court the same auxiliary aids and

16 remedies that Defendants refuse to provide:

17

• a gualified ASL interpreter to help him communicate effectively with prison staff, educational and vocational

18

instructors work progJ;:am managers and coordinators, medical staff, healthcare provtders, mental health professionals and

19

pharmacists, and disciplinary officers;

20

• non-aural, non-written notification of emergencies or other important events and announcements, e.g., a vibrating pager;

21

• batteries for Bryant's hearing aids as needed;

22

• access to telecommunication devices appropriate for the deaf,

23

such as. a v!deophone or of heanng mmates; and

TTY,

equal

to

the

telephone

privileges

24 25

•

safe access to a television enabled ~ommensurate with the television

with closed-captioning, privileges afforded to other

mmates.

26 In the alternative to his receiving these requested auxiliary aids and services at

27 USP Victorville and any other BOP institution where Bryant may reside, Bryant
28

-4-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 6 of 372 Page ID #:9

1 requests a transfer to another prison, state or federal, with deaf inmates and 2 programs for the deaf similar to those listed above.

3

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

4

13. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to

5 28 U.S.C. § 1331 because this action arises under the Constitution and laws of the

6 United States.

7

14. Venue is proper in this judicial district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §

8 1391 (e) because Bryant and some or all of the Defendants reside in this district,

9 and a substantial part of the events and omissions giving rise to Bryant's claims

10 occurred in this district.

11

12

A. Plaintiff

THE PARTIES

13

15. Bryant is currently serving a life sentence at USP Victorville in

14 Adelanto, California. He is 45 years of age. Bryant has been at USP Victorville

15 since March 2010. Previously, Bryant was incarcerated at USP Hazelton in

16 Bruceton Mills, West Virginia, from August 2005 to October 2009, and USP

17 Coleman I in Coleman, Florida, from November 2009 to March 2010.

18

B. Defendants

19

16. The BOP is the federal executive agency responsible for the

20 supervision and custody of over 200,000 inmates, including Bryant. The BOP is

21 headquartered in Washington, D.C.

22

17. Harley G. Lappin ("Director Lappin") is the Director of the BOP. He

23 is responsible for the oversight and management of the BOP's 115 institutions and

24 for the safety and security of the more than 200,000 inmates under the agency's

25 jurisdiction, including the BOP's policies and practices regarding the treatment of

26 and services provided to disabled inmates. He is aware of the BOP's and USP

27 Victorville's policies and practices regarding disabled individuals and, more

28 specifically, Defendants' failure to accommodate Bryant's deafness in USP

-5-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 7 of 372 Page ID #:10

1 Victorville's programs and services, including the administrative remedy program. 2 He is sued in his official capacity.

3

18. Robert E. McFadden ("Regional Director McFadden") is the Regional

4 Director of the BOP's Western Region. He is responsible for the "development,

5 approval, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of policies, operations and

6 programs" for the 11 federal institutions and three complexes in the Western

7 Region, including USP Victorville. He is aware of the BOP's and USP 8 Victorville's policies and practices regarding disabled individuals and, more 9 specifically, Defendants' failure to accommodate Bryant's deafuess in USP 10 Victorville's programs and services, including the administrative remedy program. 11 He is sued in his official capacity.

12

19. Francisco J. Quintana ("Warden Quintana") is the warden ofUSP

13 Victorville and is responsible for the day-to-day operations of the prison.

14 Pursuant to the BOP's Program Statement ("PS") 1330.16, entitled the

15 "Administrative Remedy Program," Warden Quintana is also "responsible for the

16 implementation and operation of the Administrative Remedy Program at the ...

17 institution[al] level[]," including "ensur[ing] that reasonable accommodation[s]"

18 are available "in order for an inmate with a disability to prepare and process" an

19 administrative remedy request or appeal. (PS 1330.16 §§ 542.11(a), 542.16(b).)

20 He is aware of the BOP's and USP Victorville's policies and practices regarding

21 disabled individuals and, more specifically, Defendants' failure to accommodate

22 Bryant's deafuess in USP Victorville's programs and services, including the

23 administrative remedy program. He is sued in his official capacity.

24

20. At all times relevant to this action, Director Lappin, Regional Director

25 McFadden and Warden Quintana were acting pursuant to their authority as an

26 official, agent, contractor or employee of the United States.

27

28

-6-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 8 of 372 Page ID #:11

1

STATEMENT OF FACTS

2

A. USP Hazelton (August 2005 - October 2009)

3

i. Lack of Effective Communication and Auxiliary Aids and

4

Services

5

21. Bryant entered USP Hazelton in August 2005. Within his first week

6 at the prison, USP Hazelton staff recognized that without the aid of a qualified

7 ASL interpreter and the other auxiliary aids that Bryant seeks, Bryant had

8 problems communicating with staff and participating in the same activities and

9 programs as hearing inmates.

10

22. On or about August 5, 2005, Jennifer L. Tennant-an Assistant

11 Clinical Scientist Officer associated with USP Hazelton-performed a

12 psychological evaluation of Bryant, noting, among other things, that he is "deaf

13 and mute." No ASL interpreter was provided and Ms. Tennant had difficulty

14 communicating with Bryant. According to a psychological evaluation prepared by

15 Ms. Tennant:

16

[T]he interview was conducted via lip reading and

17

wnting. Inmate Bryant indicated he could not read the PSIQ, so the questions were asked of him.

18

Communication with Inmate Bryant was challengin~ since he indicated he could only read 1i.Ps "a little bit'

19

and reported difficulty reading the PSI(.}.

20

23. On or about October 18, 2005, Bryant was reevaluated by Ms.

21 Tennant with the aid of an ASL interpreter. At this session, Ms. Tennant was able

22 to communicate with Bryant because the ASL interpreter was able to explain Ms.

23 Tennant's questions and communicate Bryant's answers. However, because of

24 Bryant's prior visits with medical personnel without the aid of a qualified ASL

25 interpreter, Bryant did not know his current medications or psychiatric history.

26 Ms. Tennant noted in her evaluation of Bryant:

27

28

-7-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 9 of 372 Page ID #:12

1

Bryant presented without acute distress and reported some negative somatic side effects from his current

2

medicatiOn regimen of Haldol, Trazodone; Prolixin, Prozac and Cogentin. When questioned aoout his

3

psychiatric history and the ratiOnale for his being prescribed all of these medications he was largely unable

4

to provide any useful information. This was like1y a combination of unfamiliarity with his medications and

5

communication difficulties.

6 After successfully communicating with Bryant through a qualified ASL interpreter, 7 Ms. Tennant decided to adjust Bryant's drug regimen, with the goal of weaning 8 him off the medications entirely.

9

24. Also on October 18, 2005, Shannon R. Toothman, a Psychology

10 Technician associated with USP Hazelton, conducted a separate psychiatric

11 evaluation of Bryant without the aid of a qualified ASL interpreter. Ms. Toothman

12 noted in the psychiatric evaluation that Bryant "was unable to accurately discuss

13 his [medical] history." Ms. Toothman also noted that Bryant "may have been

14 given medication for what appeared to be agitation, likely related to difficulty

15 communicating."

16

25. Upon information and belief, following Bryant's appointments on

17 October 18, 2005, USP Hazelton never again provided to Bryant the means to

18 communicate effectively with medical personnel or any other members of prison

19 staff or administration.

20

26. On or about December 6, 2005, in a subsequent psychological

21 evaluation conducted without an ASL interpreter, Ms. Tennant noted that Bryant

22 "continues to miss callouts and has to be tracked down for appointments."

23

27. On or about February 1, 2006, Ms. Tennant performed another

24 psychological evaluation of Bryant, again without an ASL interpreter. In that

25 evaluation, she noted that "[c]ommunication with Bryant remains a challenge as he

26 is quite difficult to understand verbally or via signing (this author does not know

27 ASL)." Nevertheless, Ms. Tennant noted that Bryant reported symptoms of

28 "increased sadness and frustration" and "increased difficulty sleeping."

-8-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 10 of 372 Page ID #:13

1

28. While incarcerated at USP Hazleton, Bryant was unable to participate

2 in education programs. For example, on or about November 2006, Bryant enrolled

3 in USP Hazelton's "Drug Education Correction Course," but was unable to

4 effectively participate in that program because of the lack of a qualified ASL

5 interpreter. An evaluation of his performance dated November 9, 2006 reveals that

6 "[c]ommunication between [Bryant] and staff is conducted through written

7 medium" and that Bryant "has difficulty understanding the concepts." (Lachance

8 Performance Evaluation, Nov. 9, 2006 (attached as Ex. 1).) As Bryant does not

9 communicate effectively in "written medium" and no qualified ASL interpreter

10 was provided, he had difficulty understanding the concepts expressed in written

11 and spoken English.

12

29. Upon information and belief, the BOP had an "IP Video Network"

13 since at least 2002 which is utilized for, among other things, "conducting daily

14 conferences in telemedicine and telepsychiatry." In combination with Video

15 Remote Interpreting ("VRI") - video interpreting accomplished by use of video

16 conference technology over high-speed internet lines - this network could easily

17 have been used to allow Bryant to communicate with medical staff, healthcare

18 providers, mental health professionals and pharmacists.

19

30. Upon information and belief, at the time of Bryant's incarceration at

20 USP Hazelton, USP Hazelton was in negotiation, if not already under contract,

21 with West Virginia University ("WVU") to have WVU provide educational classes

22 at USP Hazelton through an interactive video network. Such a system could have

23 been used, in combination with USP Hazelton's use or knowledge of an interactive

24 video network for educational programming, to allow Bryant to communicate with

25 educational and vocational instructors.

26

31. Bryant also missed important official announcements because USP

27 Hazleton did not provide him the reasonable auxiliary aid of a non-aural method of

28 notification, e.g., a vibrating pager. Bryant was then punished for missing these

-9-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 11 of 372 Page ID #:14

1 official announcements and was isolated from the general prison population. For 2 example, on or about June 27, 2007, Bryant was not made aware of an 3 announcement that it was time for the inmates to line up to go to the cafeteria. The 4 announcement was made verbally, and no CO alerted Bryant that it was meal time. 5 A short while later, Bryant asked to be taken to the cafeteria on his own, but the 6 CO refused. According to an "Incident Report" authored by an unknown USP 7 Hazelton employee, Bryant "threatened" the CO and, as punishment, was sent to 8 the Special Housing Unit ("SHU"). The incident report notes the following 9 statement from Bryant (although it is unclear by what method of communication it 10 was provided): "I didn't hear him call end of move. I got mad because I wanted to 11 go eat. I was wrong, but I wanted to go eat." (Incident Report, June 28, 2007
12 (attached as Ex. 2) at 5i .)

13

32. USP Hazelton staff also interfered with Bryant's use of his hearing

14 aids. Hearing aids will at times emit a high-pitched ring, which is caused by

15 feedback from lack of a proper fit or electronic or mechanical problems with the

16 hearing aid. Because Bryant is deaf, he cannot hear when feedback is emitted from

17 his hearing aids. Upon information and belief, in early February 2009, a CO

18 communicated to Bryant that Bryant's hearing aids were ringing and Bryant would

19 be put in the SHU for eight months unless he took out his hearing aids.

20

33. At least one CO employed at USP Hazelton during Bryant's

21 incarceration knew and understood some ASL. Despite Bryant's repeated requests

22 for a qualified ASL interpreter to help him communicate with prison staff and to

23 participate in prison programs (see, e.g.,~~ 35, 42, 43, 46, 48, 49, 52, infra), USP

24 Hazelton refused even to assign this CO to Bryant's unit.

25

26

27

28

1 The exhibits attached to this complaint are paginated consecutively to the principal document, per Local Rule 11-5.2. Pin citations in this complaint reference the consecutive page number.

-10-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 12 of 372 Page ID #:15

1

ii.

Bryant's Failed Attempts to Use the Remedy Process at USP Hazelton

Administrative

2

34. The BOP has a four-step Administrative Remedy Process. It is

3 described in 28 C.F.R. Part 542, BOP PS 1330.16 and individual institutional

4 supplements.

5

35. On or about October 17, 2007, Bryant filed an "Inmate Request to

6 Staff' and an "informal resolution form" ("BP-8"). In his "Inmate Request to

7 Staff," Bryant wrote: "I heard all staff give hard time not by understanding my

8 communicate's sign language." (Inmate Request to Staff, Oct. 17, 2007 (attached 9 as Ex. 3).) In his BP-8, Bryant wrote "I am deaf' in large letters in the top margin. 10 In that BP-8, Bryant also wrote that he could not communicate effectively with 11 prison staff and requested an ASL interpreter, access to closed-captioned television 12 and a transfer to a medical facility better equipped to accommodate his deafuess: 2

13 14 15 16

lB2fuPao9nlunredtgpapeuusorresaoisnpgtgpaterldnNaeNodmaonsohte'ottoarmIwucmnncymeedeepfenyadtrtusagfilteltnoa.enthletdeoirnaemgFlst.thyCAtap.clIslor.koomigntIomraaMymumoonurfiFcger.eaaChltnie.eInta'o.sgrwttshswinaog,trinlrWwlyhVaybAout

17 18 19

TmFpwI rrhaiiu~tsmihssugtnruErdadasedtmepaeurdfcssntpmaobatetnyiucoadsimncat. clcygemaopcpetottonimmotManymlcosu~lirenoggaispalcetnaldhattoenoF'wgns.CunfTar.IWogV.mewVAoiuAlrlsslgopFhee.IwtCnlmpit.leIltt.roogpoermret tee.r

20 (BP-8, Oct. 17, 2007 (attached as Ex. 4).)

21

36. On or about November 3, 2007, Joe D. Driver, then the Warden of

22 USP Hazelton, dismissed Bryant's request for auxiliary aids without actually

23

24 25 26 27 28

prBppMaf2earcrrrccioiecysseidvoloaoiiiimvnntncdyeteaeBm.pdrsldrsraoCoaFy'tBdtgeraenarorFnneaytamMeettcame'dcsnhrCasetirfBpsseoaasBpqurnnd_rtutdiaouonAstcexnaesstcSibereetmoLrril(tmvleo"aidiviFttm~neybeiMemstel~oewiy,oCdortaprnna1iasnrtBs9nweictb8otsurliea6.anfttuersnhtsdeteresorisadcornenl"1tgdoohdh)9sneaeti9efondtuh1cdutolia,-BchlscauyBemuatfltriiBdpcenry~atsdOenpawptairnahcaP,lnrtaab.Nmtnwliilpscedogfraiabr.poosktcoahgfniiTttrlnphoeiC~hctrwmyeaaaoaswnlrrvtbeo,cdriadeelediartgurainetnanetteamidtgorl.eoidfeeaztfFhnlgdesaseMtueoutcmiBa_ceFpCffp.rrpeityrBdaeoaaidevunnritttadonleedr

-11-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 13 of 372 Page ID #:16

1 addressing any of his concerns: "Staff at USP Hazelton have worked with you and 2 assisted you in the last 26 months to ensure your legitimate needs are met."

3 (Inmate Request to Staff Response, Nov. 3, 2007 (attached as Ex. 5) at 64.) In 4 fact, USP Hazelton had refused to accommodate the "legitimate needs" that Bryant 5 listed in his complaint.

6

37. On or about December 21,2007, Bryant filed two additional BP-8s-

7 this time with the assistance of counsel and a qualified ASL interpreter.

8

38. In the first BP-8 submitted on December 21, 2007, Bryant stated that

9 "[a]s a deaf man, I am unable to participate in the programs offered at this facility"

10 and asked for an auxiliary aid that would allow him to participate in "Adult GED,

11 Adult Continuing Education, and other programs that would further my

12 rehabilitation." Bryant also stated that, although the televisions in his unit were

13 equipped for closed-captioning, "the other inmates in the facility do not like it

14 when it is used because it hides part of the screen." Bryant requested "to be

15 afforded the same rights and privileges that the hearing inmates are afforded."

16 (BP-8, Dec. 21, 2007 (attached as Ex. 6).)

17

39. In the second BP-8 submitted on December 21, 2007, Bryant noted

18 that USP Hazelton went on "Emergency Lock-down status" that day. Bryant wrote

19 that emergencies such as a lockdown are particularly dangerous for him because he

20 cannot "hear and respond to" alarms or verbal warnings. Bryant requested that he

21 be transferred to a medical facility to avoid this danger. (BP-8, Dec. 21, 2007

22 (attached as Ex. 7).)

23

40. Bryant has no record of responses to the BP-8s he filed on

24 December 21, 2007.

25

41. On or about June 1, 2008, Bryant filed an "Inmate Request to Staff'

26 without the assistance of counsel, again requesting a transfer to another prison

27 where he might have access to an Adult GED program, an Adult Continuing

28 Education program and other programs to further his rehabilitation. His request

-12-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 14 of 372 Page ID #:17

1 was denied on or about June 4, 2008 by "H. Boyles"-upon information and

2 belief, a health services administrator at USP Hazleton-who noted that "[t]here is

3 no medical reason to transfer you." (Inmate Request to Staff Disposition, June 4,

4 2008 (attached as Ex. 8).)

5

42. On or about June 4, 2008, Bryant filed a formal request for an

6 administrative remedy ("BP-9"). In this BP-9, Bryant noted that he is deaf and that

7 his lawyer helped him draft his request. Bryant requested an interpreter to help

8 him access programs. (BP-9, June 4, 2008 (attached as Ex. 9).) Specifically,

9 Bryant asked for auxiliary aids so that he could: (i) participate in educational and 10 vocational programs, (ii) communicate with other staff members, (iii)

11 communicate with other inmates, (iv) access appropriate medical and mental health 12 care, and (v) enjoy television with closed-captioning enabled. (/d.)

13

43. On or about June 11, 2008, Bryant filed a Regional Administrative

14 Remedy Appeal ("BP-10") and a Central Office Administrative Remedy Appeal

15 ("BP-11 ")on the same day, again without the assistance of counsel. The two

16 forms requested the same relief:

17

I am deaf in USP Hazelton. BOP refuse get me transfer

18

for ~edical care F.C.I. programs No mterpreter

19

No closed captioning No mental health care

20

No medical care No programs educational

21

No programs vocational

Thank you

22

Respect

23 (BP-10, June 11, 2008 (attached as Ex. 10); BP-11, June 11,2008 (attached as

24 Ex. 11 ).) Bryant has no record of responses to these appeals.

25

44. Bryant continued to utilize the BOP's administrative remedy process,

26 filing eight administrative remedy requests and appeals between October 2008 and

27 January 2009, all resulting in failed attempts to resolve the problems he

28 experienced at USP Hazelton. As a result of not receiving auxiliary aids to assist

-13-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 15 of 372 Page ID #:18

1 him in understanding and using the administrative remedy process, Bryant's

2 requests were rejected time and again based on procedural technicalities, including

3 that Bryant had directed his request to the wrong department or had failed to file

4 his requests or subsequent appeals at the correct institutional level.

5

45. On October 1, 2008, Bryant filed a BP-9 complaining about the lack

6 of proper medical programs at USP Hazelton and requesting a transfer to a medical

7 facility: "Please I need you will see this trust its still get go to transfer Also I am

8 complain about for facility medical programs prison." (BP-9, Oct. 1, 2008

9 (attached as Ex. 12).) Bryant also included citations to two Fourth Circuit

10 decisions, noting that "this complaint is Brought over the denial of a transfer to

11 USP Canaan for Medical Reason of being Hearing Impaired." (!d.)

12

46. On October 7, 2008, Bryant filed another BP-9, again noting that USP

13 Hazelton had not accommodated his disability:

14 15 16

cfNUiagoSpuPtmrieoHenodauiTzcteValflt.oocrnTamrhreeea,ftgNuaosolel.tdmoTgepihnrvoateagnlrmkahmeyeoagslu.othRtoceastrhpeee,cNNt ooPiclnelotaessreepdgreetter,

17 (BP-9, Oct. 7, 2008 (attached as Ex. 13).)

18

47. On October 20, 2008, Bryant filed another BP-9 requesting a transfer

19 to a prison where he might have access to the basic services and programs to which

20 he was denied at USP Hazelton:

21 22 23

I am deaf

go to the comyuter in the library, of correctiona facili!Y' s unit also

I was find still good

lots about

medical care [andl mental mental health of tfie deaf.

health

care,

other

education

24

~BP-9, Oct. 20, 2008 (attached as Ex. 14).~ 'real good for me go to programs facility.'

Bryant also stated that it would be (!d.)

25

48. On November 6, 2008, Bryant filed a BP-8, drafted with the

26 assistance of counsel, complaining that "I am deaf and need interpreters to

27 communicate effectively with healthcare providers, program providers, instructors

28 of classes, clerics, and other people who provide services to inmates." (BP-8,

-14-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 16 of 372 Page ID #:19

1 Nov. 6, 2008 and response, Nov. 21, 2008 (attached as Ex. 15).) Upon information

2 and belief, Bryant's counselor indicated on the BP-8 that his request should be

3 referred to "Health Services" and "Correctional Services." (!d.) H. Boyles

4 rejected Bryant's request on November 21, 2008, advising Bryant to "speak with

5 Education. Health Services does not do this." (!d.)

6

49. On November 9, 2008, Bryant filed two BP-9s, drafted with the

7 assistance of counsel. In the first BP-9, Bryant stated: "I cannot hear the alarm in

8 my cell always. I want a strobe and/or vibrating alarm in my cell." (BP-9, Nov. 9,

9 2008 (attached as Ex. 16).) In the second BP-9, Bryant wrote: "I am deaf and

10 need an ASL interpreter to communicate effectively with healthcare providers,

11 instructors of classes, clerics, and other people who provide services to inmates."

12 (BP-9, Nov. 9, 2008 (attached as Ex. 17).) Bryant filed a BP-10 and a BP-11 on

13 December 16, 2008 and January 20, 2009, respectively, both worded identically to

14 his BP-9 that requested an ASL interpreter. (BP-10, Dec. 16, 2008 (attached as Ex.

15 18); BP-11, Jan. 20, 2009 (attached as Ex. 19).) On February 5, 2009, the

16 administrative remedy coordinator at the BOP's Central Office rejected Bryant's

17 Jan. 20, 2009 BP-11 because he "submitted [his] request to the wrong level. ...

18 [Bryant] must first file a BP-9 request through the institution for the warden's

19 review and response before filing an appeal at this level." (BP-11 Response, Feb.

20 5, 2009 (attached as Ex. 20) at 95.)

21

iii. Bryant Uses the Administrative Remedy Process at USP

22

Hazleton with the Aid of ASL Interpreters Hired by His Counsel

23

50. In June 2009, Bryant retained additional counsel to assist him in

24 means of effective communication because all of his previous attempts to get

25 reasonable auxiliary aids for his deafness were denied. Before Bryant's new

26 counsel was engaged, however, Bryant was already confined to the SHU.

27

51. On July 24, 2009, Bryant's counsel wrote to James Cross, then

28 Warden of USP Hazelton ("Warden Cross"). The letter advised Warden Cross of

-15-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 17 of 372 Page ID #:20

1 Bryant's deafness and explained that counsel had "been retained by Bryant to

2 enforce his rights under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, including ... the

3 rights of reasonable accommodation for his disability and effective

4 communication." (Letter to Warden Cross, July 24, 2009 (attached as Ex. 21) at

5 97.) The July 24, 2009 letter also advised Warden Cross that Bryant would seek

6 auxiliary aids through the administrative remedy process and requested that

7 consistent with Section IO(b) ofPS 1330.16 (see~ 19}-which requires that the

8 Warden provide "assistance ... includ[ing] provision of reasonable

9 accommodation for an inmate with a disability to prepare and process a Request or

10 an Appeal"-Bryant be given the accommodation of having his lawyers sent a

11 copy of any response to his administrative remedy requests. (!d.) In the

12 alternative (and consistent with Section lO(b)), the July 24, 2009letter requested

13 that a qualified ASL interpreter assist Bryant in reviewing any administrative

14 responses and completing any subsequent administrative remedy forms. (!d. at

15 98.) These accommodations are necessary because, though Bryant can connect

16 with his counsel via TTY and TRS when available, he cannot understand legal

17 advice provided in a medium dependent upon his ability to read and write English

18 (nor can he communicate effectively with counsel). The same obstacles prevent

19 effective communication through the mail. Additionally, the timelines for

20 appealing administrative remedy responses are short, and mail is often delayed,

21 especially when the prisoner is in the SHU. Thus, without these accommodations

22 or access to a videophone and VRS, the only effective method for Bryant and his

23 counsel to communicate regarding the administrative remedy process is for

24 Bryant's counsel to visit him in person with a qualified ASL interpreter. However,

25 such visits are expensive and very difficult to coordinate within the short time

26 frame that the prison and BOP allot for inmates to appeal rejected requests.

27

52. On July 30, 2009, Bryant's counsel visited him accompanied by a

28 qualified ASL interpreter. With the assistance of counsel and the interpreter,

-16-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 18 of 372 Page ID #:21

1 Bryant filled out seven BP-8s that he filed later that day. (BP-8s, July 30, 2009

2 (attached as Ex. 22).) The forms largely reiterated the same issues that Bryant had

3 pursued through the administrative process on his own for more than a year:

4

• An inabilitY. to communicate with Qrison staff, including

5

medical and mental healthcare professionals. (!d. at 101, 106.)

6

• An inability to participate in educational, vocational and prison
work programs. (!d. at 102-03.)

7

• An inability to hear alarms and announcements, including calls

8

for line-up. (!d. at 100.)

9

• No access to television with closed-captioning. (!d. at 105.)

10 To remedy these problems, Bryant requested many of the same reasonable

11 auxiliary aids as he requests here: a qualified ASL interpreter to help him

12 understand and communicate with prison staff and participate in prison programs,

13 a vibrating alarm or pager to alert him to important safety warnings and daily

14 announcements and access to a television enabled with closed-captioning. In the

15 alternative, Bryant requested that he be transferred to a prison with deaf inmates 16 and special programs for the deaf.

17

53. On or about August 12, 2009, R.E. Milton, Bryant's unit manager,

18 rejected all of Bryant's requests. (BP-8 Responses, Aug. 12,2009 (attached as Ex.

19 23).)

20

• Regarding Bryant's requestfor an ASL interpreter to

21

communicate with medical and mental healthcare professionals: Health Services staff "have attempted to work

22

with you to overcome your disability by exchangmg and sharing written messages. It appeared this procedure was

23

mutually successful and there was an understanding obtained between you an [sic] Health Services staff. It is unfortunate,

24

you are beginning to experience problems communicating. Currently, however, we do not have staff who are skilled m

25

ASL. Nevertheless, this maybe [sic] a skill that we could explore in more detail when new staff or new hires are being

26

considered for employment at USP Hazelton." (!d. at 109.)

27

28

-17-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 19 of 372 Page ID #:22

1 2 3

• Regarding Bryant's request for an ASL interpreter to
wchooatihvmtheemreasudtttnuueicdmcaeatpntitteosen:wdaitlEtohpdwrueodcogaurrtkcaiaomwtnisiaotlbhnaSayseloeraudvnioicdnnevstyhosoectauaptrfaifoss"pntheaaacnlvidiaenpfsinrtnroeduevicdcitdsao.etresydoatunhedy However, it appears you have demonstrated very little

4

motivation to engage with the educational staff to assist you in educational and vocational programming." (!d. at 111.)

5

• Regarding Bryant's request for strobe or vibratin_g alarms, a

6

vibrating pager, or an ASL interpreter to inform liim of important warnings and announcements and to help him

7

communicate witli COs: "As an supervision by correctional staff.

inmate you In case of

are under constant emergencies and or

8
9
10

ainainndloamsdtruimaartpitesoeps[nsrs,otaiacfrvief1erfeydnaoorabeutlyaaaartlcmrhlecoesownFumoeentdeditfaeetibrtoealvd1episoafBunosuasdrelryeyscosaoouuuamrnro:pwxsflahiPefaelreneirtscceyoetarmnbowsona.iui"itnchtst(das!aidetnnrv.oediabdctwee. 1iatlI1hlnn3ad.t)is

11

54. On August 13, 2009, Bryant's counsel visited Bryant at USP Hazelton

12 with a qualified ASL interpreter. On that visit, Counselor Paul Marrero told

13 Bryant's counsel that Paul Layer, BOP Associate General Counsel, had sent an

14 email to Warden Cross asking why Bryant had not been provided with an ASL

15 interpreter. Counselor Marrero informed Bryant's counsel that USP Hazelton was

16 preparing a response. Neither Bryant nor his counsel ever received any

17 communication from Associate General Counsel Layer or any additional info

18 regarding his email to Warden Cross. Bryant also never received the interpreter

19 that he requested.

20

55. On or about August 18, 2009, Bryant submitted seven BP-9s,

21 repeating to Warden Cross the same requests that he had made in the July 30, 2009

22 BP-8s. These BP-9s were submitted as attachments to another letter from Bryant's

23 counsel to Warden Cross. (Letter to Warden Cross and attached BP-9s, Aug. 18,

24 2009 (attached as Ex. 24).) That letter again requested that Bryant be given the

25 accommodation of having his lawyers sent a copy of any response to his

26 administrative remedy requests. (!d.) Because USP Hazelton had failed to provide

27 Bryant the accommodations requested by the July 24, 2009, and August 18, 2009

28 letters, Bryant was forced to mail the BP-8 responses to his counsel and they

-18-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 20 of 372 Page ID #:23

1 arrived after the August 13, 2009 legal visit. It would have been impossible to 2 attach the BP-8 responses to the August 18, 2009 BP-9s and mail them back to 3 Bryant in time for him to file them within the prison's filing deadline, so Bryant's 4 counsel mailed them on Bryant's behalf.

5

56. In a letter dated August 31,2009 and mailed almost two weeks later,

6 Warden Cross responded to both Bryant's counsel's July 24, 2009 letter and

7 Bryant's August 18, 2009 BP-9s and the letter that accompanied them. Despite

8 Bryant's demonstrated inability to complete the administrative remedy process on

9 his own over the past three years or communicate with staff, Warden Cross wrote

10 that "Bryant ha[d] complete access to the Administrative Remedy Program" and

11 that Bryant had been able "to resolve numerous issues" through "written

12 correspondence" with staff. (Warden Cross Letter, Aug. 31, 2009 (attached as Ex.

13 25) (without enclosures).) Warden Cross also refused to copy Bryant's counsel on

14 all responses to Bryant's administrative remedy requests, or otherwise

15 accommodate Bryant's communication with his counsel, on the basis of his belief

16 that Bryant could communicate with counsel via email/ mail or by a TDD. (!d. at

17 143-44.)

18

57. Warden Cross then denied the BP-9s, although timely submitted,

19 because, according to Warden Cross, Bryant had not used "the program in good

20 faith" or "in an honest and straightforward manner." (!d. at 143.) It appears that

21 Warden Cross was referring to Bryant's use of counsel and a qualified ASL

22 interpreter. Warden Cross wrote that "in order to maintain the integrity of the

23 Administrative Remedy program," Bryant needed to "personally provide staff with

24 the completed Administrative Remedy for processing." (!d.) At no point did

25 Warden Cross acknowledge his failure to timely respond to the requests made in

26

27 28

F3isuarltwhearAymsltohmroeou,ngBihtroytrhaeendtBahnOadsPnnsoootmascuectbeijmsescettsotpoermaotvatioidlrenwsehyini-lcmeliahetenetsiscaoicnncfetihsdesentSotHieaUmli.tayi.l for a fee, it

-19-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 21 of 372 Page ID #:24

1 the July 24, 2009 letter or in any way accommodate Bryant's use of the

2 administrative remedy process. Even assuming that it was somehow improper for 3 Bryant's counsel to mail the BP-9s that Bryant completed (during an attorney visit 4 with the aid of a qualified ASL interpreter), it was Warden Cross's refusal to

5 provide Bryant with a qualified ASL interpreter or other assistance required by

6 Section 542.16(b) ofPS 1330.16 that necessitated Bryant's counsel to mail the BP-

7 9s. Thus, Warden Cross continued to demand Bryant's strict compliance with the

8 administrative remedy process while refusing to comply himself.

9

58. On September 28,2009, Bryant submitted seven BP-10s to the BOP's

10 Mid-Atlantic Regional Office. Accompanying those BP-1 Os was a letter from

11 Bryant's counsel explaining that Warden Cross refused to accommodate Bryant's

12 deafness or process Bryant's timely filed BP-9s. (Letter to Kim M. White,

13 Regional Director of the BOP's Mid-Atlantic Regional Office, and attached BP-

14 lOs, Sept. 28, 2009 (attached as Ex. 26).)

15

59. Regional Director White responded in a letter dated October 8, 2009

16 that Bryant had been transferred from USP Hazelton on October 6, 2009 to the

17 Federal Transfer Center ("FTC") in Oklahoma City. (White Letter, Oct. 8, 2009

18 (attached as Ex. 27).) According to Director White, the transfer "render[ed] moot

19 any specific issues [Bryant] had related to his incarceration at USP Hazelton."

20 Separately, Director White determined that Bryant's BP-lOs should be rejected

21 because (i) they did not include USP Hazelton's response to or rejection of the BP-

22 9s (which Warden Cross refused to process), and (ii) they were not mailed

23 personally by Bryant. (!d. at 178-79.)

24

B. USP Coleman I (October 2009- March 2010)

25

60. In October 2009, Bryant was transferred to USP Coleman I. The

26 issues that Bryant faced at USP Hazelton due to his deafness continued at USP

27 Coleman I. Bryant continued to be denied the same auxiliary aids for his disability

28 that he was denied at USP Hazelton:

-20-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 22 of 372 Page ID #:25

1

• Bryant was not provided any non-aural method, e.g., a vibrating pager, of learning of emergencies. Instead, prison officials

2

would attempt to track down Bryant and tap him on the shoulder to inform him of dangerous situatiOns such as

3

lockdowns-which are common at USP Coleman I-like the one that took place shortly after his transfer. (Martin E. Amos,

4

"Coleman Prison On Lockdown After Fight," Orlando Sentinel, Oct. 16h2009 (atta~hed as Ex. 28).) Similarly, be~ause Bryant

5

cannot ear any pnson announcements, Bryant mtssed some meals.

6

• Bryant was kicked several times by other inmates for trying to

7

use the closed-ca12tioning about November7, 200g,

on the unit's when Bryant

television. attempted

Then to use

on o the

r

8

closed-captioning, he was attacked by another inmate.

9

•

fFiolilnlgowoifnBgPt-h9esartetaqcukesotninB_grayuaxnitliaarnydaoidnslyfofor uhrisdadyesafanfetsesr,the

10 11

Bryant was sent to the until March 2010, i.e., at USP Coleman I.

SHU, where he was held for five months the remainder of Bryant's incarceration

12 13

•

Bryant was unable pam and insomnia ASL interpreter to

to obtain medicine from medical because he did not have access to help him explain these problems.

staff for his a qualified

14 15

• Bryant requested a qualified ASL interpreter to participate in

educational ~:mly option

programs, was to try

but his request to write notes b

was ack

refusedh· and fort

instead with

his

mstructors.

16 17

•

Due to his inability to communicate with prison inmates, Bryant had frequent misunderstandings

staff and other about his

needs and the prison schedule.

18 19 20

•

Upon kriew

information and belief, a staff member at USP Coleman ASL, but USP Coleman I refused to assigr:I that staff

I

member to Bryant's unit or to provide Bryant complete the administrative remedy process.

with

assistance

to

21

61. Additionally, new issues emerged at USP Coleman I. First, the prison

22 did not provide hearing aid batteries to Bryant on an as-needed basis. As a result,

23 Bryant's hearing aids were often useless for long periods of time. Upon

24 information and belief, a set of size 13 hearing aid batteries for Bryant's Phonak

25 PowerMAXX 411 hearing aids, the model of hearing aids Bryant used while at

26 USP Coleman I, costs approximately $2 retail.

27

62. Second, the prison had no communication device, such as a

28 videophone or TTY, for Bryant to communicate with his friends, family and

-21-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 23 of 372 Page ID #:26

1 counsel, even though other inmates had access to telephones. In December 2009,

2 two months after Bryant's arrival, USP Coleman I acquired a TTY, but did not

3 allow Bryant to use the TTY for another month. When Bryant finally was allowed

4 to use the TTY, he discovered that it could only connect to other TTYs and not a

5 relay service (TRS). A TRS is needed to communicate from a TTY to a person

6 with only a telephone, such as members of Bryant's family and his counsel.

7 Bryant tried to explain this problem to USP Coleman I staff to no avail.

8

63. On or about November 3, 2009, Bryant filed two BP-9s without the

9 assistance of counsel or a qualified ASL interpreter. In those BP-9s, Bryant

10 informed prison officials and employees that he is deaf and requested medical

11 treatment for pain and insomnia and access to a television with closed-captioning.

12 (BP-9s, Nov. 3, 2009 (attached as Ex. 29).) These requests were denied on

13 November 6, 2009, because Bryant had not first filed BP-8s. (BP-9 Responses, 14 Nov. 6, 2009 (attached as Ex. 30) at 187, 189.)

15

64. Also on November 3, 2009, Bryant's counsel sent a letter to Scott A.

16 Middlebrooks, Warden ofUSP Coleman I ("Warden Middlebrooks"), that was

17 similar in substance to the July 24, 2009 letter to Warden Cross at USP Hazelton.

18 (Letter to Warden Middlebrooks, Nov. 3, 2009 (attached as Ex. 31).) In addition to 19 advising Warden Middlebrooks about Bryant's deafuess, the November 3, 2009

20 letter explained that counsel had "been retained by Bryant to enforce his rights

21 under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, including ... the rights of reasonable 22 accommodation for his disability and effective communication." (!d.) The

23 November 3, 2009letter advised Warden Middlebrooks that Bryant would seek

24 auxiliary aids through the administrative remedy process and requested that

25 consistent with Section 542.16(b) of the BOP's PS 1330.16-which requires that

26 the Warden provide "assistance ... includ[ing] provision of reasonable

27 accommodation for an inmate with a disability to prepare and process a Request or

28 an Appeal"-Bryant be given the accommodation of having his counsel sent a

-22-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 24 of 372 Page ID #:27

1 copy of any response to his administrative remedy requests. In the alternative (and 2 consistent with Section 542.16(b)), the November 3, 2009letter requested that a

3 qualified ASL interpreter assist Bryant in reviewing any administrative responses 4 and completing any subsequent administrative remedy forms. (!d. at 192.) In 5 addition, Bryant's counsel requested that Bryant be given access to a TTY so that 6 he could communicate with his family, friends and counsel. (ld.) Within the 7 week, Bryant was placed in the SHU where he remained throughout his

8 incarceration at USP Coleman I.

9

65. In a response dated November 10, 2009, Warden Middlebrooks

10 refused to copy Bryant's counsel on any responses to his administrative remedy

11 requests, stating (without explanation) that such an accommodation "would simply

12 be too much of an administrative burden." (Middlebrooks Response, Nov. 10,

13 2009 (attached as Ex. 32) (without enclosures).) Warden Middlebrooks also stated

14 that, while USP Coleman I did not possess a TTY, the prison was "in the process

15 of securing the services of an interpreter" for Bryant. (Id.) Bryant, however, never

16 received the assistance of a qualified ASL interpreter at USP Coleman I except for

17 when his counsel provided one.

18

66. In anticipation of a legal visit with Bryant scheduled for December 11,

19 2009, Bryant's counsel attempted on December 10, 2009 to arrange a meeting with

20 Jeff Campbell, legal counsel at USP Coleman I. Bryant's counsel advised

21 Campbell that Bryant needed accommodations and asked to discuss these issues

22 with Campbell. Campbell said there was "no telling what [his] schedule will be

23 like" but that he would "drop by the visiting room ... if time permits" during

24 counsel's legal visit on December 11, 2009. (Email from Campbell, Dec. 10, 2009

25 (attached as Ex. 33).) Upon information and belief, Campbell did not come by the

26 visiting room or attempt to reschedule with Bryant's counsel.

27

67. One month later, Bryant's counsel attempted to arrange another

28 meeting with Campbell to coincide with their January 21, 2010 legal visit with

-23-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 25 of 372 Page ID #:28

1 Bryant. Despite Campbell's assurances on January 12 that he would "do [his] best 2 to meet with" Bryant's counsel, Campbell cancelled the day before the visit, 3 explaining that he could not meet with them because he would be "undergoing

4 dental surgery." (Email from Campbell, Jan. 12,2010 (attached as Ex. 34); Email 5 from Campbell, Jan. 20, 2010 (attached as Ex. 35).) Campbell said he would

6 "follow up" on the issue of Bryant's need for accommodations, but, upon 7 information and belief, he never did so.

8

68. On or about January 21, 2010, Bryant filed BP-8s, with the assistance

9 of counsel, complaining about substantially the same problems he had at USP

10 Hazelton-an inability to communicate effectively with prison staff, COs, health

11 care providers, mental health professionals, and educational, vocational and

12 rehabilitation instructors; exclusion from work and educational programs; a lack of

13 closed-captioning on television; and the prison's failure to provide him with a non-

14 aural warning system for emergencies and announcements-and requesting similar

15 remedies. He also filed BP-8s requesting a TTY or videophone and hearing aid

16 batteries. (BP-8s and Responses, Jan. 21, 2010 (attached as Ex. 36).)

17

69. On or about January 22, 2010, Bryant's counselor, Counselor Dunn,

18 rejected all of Bryant's requests. (!d.) According to Counselor Dunn, Bryant did

19 not need a qualified ASL interpreter to understand and communicate with medical

20 staff and mental health professionals because he "ha[s] the ability to read lips and

21 write [his] requests." (!d. at 208.) Counselor Dunn similarly rejected Bryant's

22 request to participate in the prison's educational and vocational programs, claiming 23 that "all~ resources and curriculum" were "available" to Bryant. (!d. at 209.)

24 Counselor Dunn also claimed that Bryant should rely on printed schedules and his

25 hearing aids to alert him to prison-wide alarms and important daily events. (!d. at

26 207, 210.) Counselor Dunn rejected Bryant's requests to participate in work

27 programs and to have safe access to a television with closed-captioning because he

28 was being held in the SHU, which does not have work programs or television.

-24-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 26 of 372 Page ID #:29

1 (/d. at 204-05.) Finally, Counselor Dunn explained that USP Coleman I had

2 obtained a TTY, and that Bryant was allotted hearing aid batteries only once every 3 six months. (!d. at 206.) Thus, even though prison staff had denied many of

4 Bryant's requests for accommodations on the basis that he should rely on his 5 hearing aids-which, in any event, would not accommodate Bryant's deafness-

6 they also continued to deny Bryant hearing aid batteries on an as-needed basis.

7

70. On February 4, 2010, Bryant submitted eight BP-9s appealing

8 Counselor Dunn's rejections of the eight BP-8s and reiterating the same requests. 9 (BP-9s, Feb. 4, 2010 (attached as Ex. 37).) During Bryant's visit with counsel that 10 same day, Bryant was able to communicate with prison officials, including Unit

11 Manager R. Mitchell, about the problems with the prison's TTY by using the 12 certified ASL interpreter hired by counsel for their legal visit. Through the

13 qualified ASL interpreter, Bryant explained that the TTY had not been enabled for 14 relay service access. Previously, Bryant explained this problem to prison officials, 15 but they were unable to understand Bryant's explanation due to the lack of a 16 qualified ASL interpreter. On February 8, in a phone conversation with Bryant's 17 counsel, Unit Manager Mitchell said that communicating with Bryant through the 18 interpreter had helped him resolve the issues with the TTY: "Coming from the

19 interpreter, [the problem with the TTY] made more sense than when Bryant

20 explained it." Mitchell said that the TTY was now able to connect to a relay 21 service, and Bryant could make calls.

22

71. On or about February 11, 2010, Warden Middlebrooks consolidated

23 five of the BP-9s into a single request for an administrative remedy. Warden

24 Middlebrooks took four of the five BP-9s-those relating to (i) work programs, (ii)

25 educational and vocational programs, (iii) communication with medical and mental

26 healthcare professionals, and (iv) prison alarms and announcements-and closed

27 them as "repetitive" of Bryant's request for a qualified ASL interpreter and a

28

-25-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 27 of 372 Page ID #:30

1 vibrating pager (collectively, the "Consolidated Requests"). (BP-9 Responses, 2 Feb. 11,2010 (attached as Ex. 38) at 231, 233, 235, 237.)

3

72. In a February 25, 2010 letter to Warden Middlebrooks, Bryant's

4 counsel requested confirmation from the prison that, because Warden

5 Middlebrooks consolidated these five BP-9s and rejected them together, "[a]ny 6 appeal of the consolidated Administrative Remedy will necessarily encompass" the 7 five Consolidated Requests. (Letter to Warden Middlebrooks, Feb. 25, 2010 8 (attached as Ex. 39).) A copy of the letter was sent to Lisa M. Sunderman, 9 Regional Counsel for the BOP's Southeast Regional Office ("SERO"). Neither 10 Bryant nor his counsel ever received a response from Warden Middlebrooks or 11 Regional Counsel Sunderman.

12

73. On or about February 22, 2010, Warden Middlebrooks rejected

13 Bryant's BP-9 requesting hearing aid batteries on an as-needed basis because

14 Bryant had received hearing aid batteries "as scheduled." (BP-9 Response, Feb.

15 22, 2010 (attached as Ex. 40) at 243.) Warden Middlebrooks claimed that the

16 hearing aid batteries should last six months "with normal regular use." (!d.)

17 Bryant's hearing aid batteries, used properly, often significantly weaken and

18 become unusable within a few days or weeks.

19

74. On February 24, 2010, Warden Middlebrooks responded to the

20 Consolidated Requests and Bryant's request for a working TTY. These requests

21 were all rejected. In rejecting Bryant's requested accommodation of a qualified

22 ASL interpreter and/or a vibrating pager, Warden Middlebrooks noted that "there

23 are no provisions in policy to provide hearing impaired inmates with pagers or

24 ASL trained staff." (BP-9 Responses, Feb. 24,2010 (attached as Ex. 41) at 250.)

25 Warden Middlebrooks, however, did not address Bryant's difficulties in

26 communicating with medical and mental healthcare professionals, educational and

27 vocational program instructors, work program managers and coordinators, COs or

28 other prison staff. He also suggested that Bryant should not need the services of a

-26-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 28 of 372 Page ID #:31

1 qualified ASL interpreter or a vibrating pager because he was provided with 2 hearing aids and batteries for those hearing aids "as needed." In response to the 3 request for a TTY, Warden Middlebrooks explained that Bryant had "made several 4 successful calls using the TTY machine and ... used a relay service." (!d. at 252.) 5 Warden Middlebrooks omitted any mention that these successful calls were the 6 direct result of Bryant having identified the problem with the TTY to Unit 7 Manager Mitchell through the aid of a certified ASL interpreter. On February 25, 8 2010, Warden Middlebrooks also denied Bryant's request for safe access to a 9 television with closed-captioning. (BP-9 Response, Feb. 25, 2010 (attached as Ex. 10 42) at 255.)

11

75. On March 11, 2010, Bryant submitted three BP-10s regarding: (i) the

12 five Consolidated Requests, which were attached to the BP-10 along with Warden

13 Middlebrooks' responses and the February 25, 2010 letter to Warden

14 Middlebrooks; (ii) Bryant's request for safe access to television with closed-

15 captioning; and (iii) Bryant's request for new hearing aid batteries when the old

16 batteries weaken or become unusable, rather than when he is "scheduled" to

17 receive them. (BP-10s, Mar. 11, 2010 (attached as Ex. 43).) On or about March

18 15, 2010, SERO's Administrative Remedy Coordinator rejected Bryant's BP-10

19 covering the Consolidated Requests on the ground that it "raise[d] more than one

20 issue/related issue," despite the fact that Warden Middlebrooks had consolidated

21 the BP-9s, and that SERO's counsel never responded to the February 25, 2010

22 letter sent by Bryant's counsel. (BP-10 Response, Mar. 15,2010 (attached as Ex.

23 44) at 285.) Before Bryant received responses to the other two BP-lOs, he was

24 transferred to USP Victorville on March 16,2010.

25

26

27

28

-27-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 29 of 372 Page ID #:32

1

c. USP Victorville (March 2010- present)

2
3

i.

Bryant's Lack Victorville

of

Accommodations

Continues

at

USP

4

76. Bryant was transferred to USP Victorville on March 18,2010 and he

5 remains incarcerated there as of the date of this filing. The issues that Bryant faced

6 at USP Hazelton and USP Coleman I due to his deafness continue today because

7 Bryant still is being denied reasonable accommodations:

8
9

•

vBiroyraantitnhgapsangoetr,boeefnleparronvinidgeodfaenmyenrognen-acuieras;l method, e.g., a

10 11

•

umWneiantbhtlaoeluthtoethacelotmhasmpsriuostnfaeincscsaietoeoneafflfase;qcutiavleiflyiewd iAthSmL eindtiecraplrsettaefrf,

Bryant is including

12 13

•

wiBinnristyethedaanuindtcsahhttraiiussocnorteaonglrlysup;erosopt~etiadomnasqi,subtaoulittfrihyeidstorAewSqruLieteisntntheoartpsersbebeteearnctkoreaQfnuadsretfdioc;ritphate

14 15

•

iaDnnumdeatthtoeesh,sicBshrieyndaaunbltielh;itaystforecqoumenmtumniicsuatnedweristthanpdriisnogns

staff and other about his needs

16 17

•

Because Bryant cannot has missed some meals

hear any prison announcements, and other activities;

Bryant

18

•

Bryant has been denied including plumbing and

work in factory

certain prison work, because

work progr:ams, of his disability;

19 20

•

BClroysaendt-'scaupntiitodneinspgitheashinsortebqeueenstetnhaabtlietdbeonenthaeblteedle; visions in

21
22

•

Bryant has been denied access bemg held in the SHU despite the same position have at feast

to a TTY or a videophone while the fact that hearing prisoners in some access to telephones; and

23
24

•

srUeuSsopPsotiVntusiectettoofrovBrilrplyreoahnpaets'rslpyrleaaqccuecedosmtBsmrfyooardnaatctiicnnogtmhhemisSoHddeaUatifoninnedssesa.fninditaeslya in

25

77. USP Victorville staff recognizes that without the aid of a qualified

26 ASL interpreter and the other accommodations that Bryant seeks, Bryant has

27 problems communicating with staff and participating in the same activities as

28 hearing inmates. On April13, 2010, Bryant's counsel called Bryant's unit

-28-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 30 of 372 Page ID #:33

1 manager at the time, Chris Jackson, to arrange to visit Bryant. Jackson and 2 Bryant's counsel also discussed the problems that Bryant was having at USP 3 Victorville. Jackson recognized that "people get frustrated with [Bryant] because 4 they don't understand" him, and said he was talking to his staff about how to 5 respond to Bryant's disability. Jackson also said that he was "reading up on the 6 disability act" and would give Bryant anything that was required. Nevertheless, 7 Bryant went without working hearing aids for at least two months following his 8 transfer to USP Victorville and has never been provided with a qualified ASL 9 interpreter or any of the other accommodations to which he is entitled under the 10 Rehabilitation Act (except by his counsel). Like USP Hazelton and USP Coleman 11 I, USP Victorville also refused to accommodate Bryant's attempts to utilize the 12 administrative remedy process.

13

78. On March 22, 2010, Bryant's counsel sent a letter to Joseph L.

14 Norwood, formerly the warden of USP Victorville, that was similar in substance to

15 the July 24, 2009letter to Warden Cross at USP Hazleton and the November 3,

16 2009 letter to Warden Middlebrooks at USP Coleman I. (Letter to Warden

17 Norwood (attached as Ex. 45); ~~51, 64, supra.) In addition to advising Warden

18 Norwood about Bryant's disability, the March 22, 2010 letter explained that

19 counsel had "been retained by Bryant to enforce his rights under Section 504 of the

20 Rehabilitation Act, including ... the rights of reasonable accommodation for his

21 disability and effective communication." (!d. at 287) The March 22,2010 letter

22 also advised Warden Norwood that Bryant would seek auxiliary aids through the

23 administrative remedy process and requested that consistent with Section

24 542.16(b) of the BOP's PS 1330.16--which requires that the Warden provide

25 "assistance ... includ[ing] provision of reasonable accommodation for an inmate

26 with a disability to prepare and process a Request or an Appeal"-Bryant be given

27 the accommodation of having his lawyers sent a copy of any response to his

28 administrative remedy requests. (!d. at 288) In the alternative (and consistent with

-29-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 31 of 372 Page ID #:34

1 Section 542 .16(b)), the March 22, 2010 letter requested that a qualified ASL

2 interpreter assist Bryant in reviewing any administrative responses and completing

3 any subsequent administrative remedy forms. (!d. at 288-89) Neither Warden

4 Norwood nor the subsequent warden, Warden Quintana, responded to this letter.

5 They also did not grant Bryant the reasonable accommodations requested.

6

79. On March 29,2010, Bryant submitted a BP-8, with the assistance of

7 counsel and a qualified ASL interpreter, stating that his transfer from USP

8 Coleman I to USP Victorville was retaliatory and done to thwart his completion of

9 the administrative remedy process by attempting to moot his previous claims (the

10 "Retaliatory Transfer BP-8"). Bryant requested that his grievances at USP

11 Coleman I proceed through the administrative process despite his transfer, and that

12 the BOP not transfer him again until he completed the administrative remedy

13 process. Furthermore, because the transfer to USP Victorville did not remedy his

14 need for auxiliary aids, Bryant requested the same relief he had requested in

15 substantially similar forms for over two years. Bryant submitted an identical BP-9

16 on April1, 2010 (the "Retaliatory Transfer BP-9"). (BP-9, April1, 2010 (attached

17 as Ex. 46).)

18

80. In April2010, Unit Manager Jackson told Bryant's counsel that

19 Bryant's transfer had been coded a "323 transfer," but that he did not receive any

20 paperwork explaining why Bryant's transfer was marked with this code. Prison

21 regulations define a 323 transfer as: "CLOSE SUPERVISION CASE: Transfer as

22 a result of an investigation that indicates a safety, security, or escape risk." Bryant

23 was not then and is not now aware of any investigation involving him, or any

24 threat to his safety or security other than the Defendants' failure to accommodate

25 his disability by failing to (i) protect him from other inmates who objected to his

26 use of television closed-captioning, and (ii) provide him with a vibrating pager or

27 some other non-auditory, non-written notification system for alarms and other

28 emergencies. These same risks still exist at USP Victorville.

-30-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 32 of 372 Page ID #:35

1

81. On April 18, 2010, Bryant, with the aid of a qualified ASL interpreter

2 hired by his counsel, submitted three BP-11s to the BOP's Central Office-the

3 final step in the BOP's administrative remedy process-seeking necessary and

4 reasonable accommodations for his deafness. (BP-11 s, April 18, 2010 (attached as

5 Ex. 47).)

6

82. In the first BP-11 submitted on April18, 2010, Bryant repeated the

7 five Consolidated Requests, noting that the warden at USP Coleman I had

8 consolidated these requests and that the SERO rejected the Consolidated Requests

9 on March 15, 2010 because Bryant listed them on a single BP-10. (ld at 293.) In

10 a response dated May 7, 2010, the Administrative Remedy Coordinator of the

11 BOP's Central Office rejected his first BP-11 on the ground that Bryant should

12 have submitted his request to SERO in a BP-10 before appealing to the Central

13 Office in a BP-11. (BP-11 Response, May 7, 2010 (attached as Ex. 48) at 325.)

14 However, on April23, 2010, the SERO had already rejected Bryant's BP-10.

15

83. In the second BP-11 Bryant submitted on April18, 2010, Bryant

16 again requested safe access to a television with closed-captioning. (BP-11 s, April

17 18, 2010 (attached as Ex. 47) at 318.) Bryant noted that he never received a

18 response to the BP-10 he submitted on March 12, 2010 and that the earlier

19 response to his BP-9 did not address his being attacked by a fellow inmate after

20 Bryant attempted to utilize the closed-captioning at USP Coleman I. Five days

21 after Bryant submitted his BP-11 (and over one month after he submitted his BP-

22 10), the SERO responded on April23, 2010. SERO's Regional Director rejected

23 Bryant's request on the ground that his subsequent transfer rendered moot any

24 failures to properly accommodate Bryant's disability that occurred at USP

25 Coleman I. (BP-10 Response, April23, 2010 (attached as Ex. 49) at 328.) The

26 Central Office later rejected Bryant's April 18, 2010 BP-11 on the grounds that he

27 had failed to attach SERO's response-an untimely response that Bryant received

28

-31-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 33 of 372 Page ID #:36

1 only after he timely filed the BP-11 on Aprill8, 2010. (BP-11 Response, May 7,

2 2010 (attached as Ex. 50) at 331.)

3

84. In the third of the three BP-lls Bryant submitted on April18, 2010,

4 Bryant reiterated his request for hearing aid batteries on an as-needed basis-the

5 same request he had made in his March 12,2010 BP-10. (BP-lls, Aprill8, 2010

6 (attached as Ex. 47) at 313.) Seven days after Bryant submitted his BP-11 (and

7 over two weeks after the BOP's own deadline), SERO responded on April27,

8 2010. SERO's Regional Director rejected Bryant's request, explaining that Bryant

9 should "refer to the Health Services Unit at [USP Victorville] to determine their

10 policy as to how and when replacement batteries will be issued to [him]." (BP-10

11 Response, April27, 2010 (attached as Ex. 51) at 334.) On May 7, 2010, the

12 Central Office rejected this BP-11 on the grounds that Bryant failed to attach

13 SERO's response to his BP-10, an untimely response that Bryant received only

14 after he timely filed the BP-11 on April18, 2010. (BP-11 Response, May 7, 2010

15 (attached as Ex. 52) at 337.)

16

85. On May 4, 2010, Bryant submitted a BP-10 regarding his retaliatory

17 transfer. In that BP-1 0, Bryant said that it had been more than 20 days since he

18 had submitted the Retaliatory Transfer BP-9, he had not received a response and

19 his complaint had not been remedied. (BP-10, May 4, 2010 (attached as Ex. 53) at

20 339.) Bryant then repeated the same language from his Retaliatory Transfer BP-9,

21 in which he requested that his transfer not interfere with his completion of the

22 administrative remedy process and requested auxiliary aids for his disability. (See

23 ~ 79, supra.)

24

86. On the same day that Bryant submitted the May 4, 2010 BP-10,

25 Warden Quintana rejected the Retaliatory Transfer BP-9. (BP-9 Response, May 4,

26 2010 (attached as Ex. 54) at 343.) Though Warden Quintana's response was

27 untimely and Bryant's May 4, 2010 BP-10 was properly submitted, on or about

28 May 20, 2010, Bryant submitted another BP-1 0 to avoid any improper rejection for

-32-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 34 of 372 Page ID #:37

1 failure to attach the untimely response (the "Retaliatory Transfer BP-1 0"). (BP-1 0, 2 May 24,2010 (attached as Ex. 55).)

3

87. On May 18, 2010, Bryant turned in his hearing aids to medical staff at

4 USP Victorville because the hearing aids were not working properly. As of the

5 date of this filing, however, Bryant still has not received new hearing aids.

6

88. In a response to Bryant's Retaliatory Transfer BP-10, dated June 30,

7 2010, Regional Director Robert E. McFadden stated that the "Warden's response

8 addressed each issue you listed in your BP-9" and "[w]e concur with the Warden's

9 response." (BP-10 Response, June 30, 2010 (attached as Ex. 56) at 350.) Regional

10 Director McFadden also said that in regard to Bryant's "hearing aid concerns,"

11 "Health Services notified you of your approval to have a consult with an Ear, Nose

12 and Throat Specialist" and that he would receive batteries for his hearing aid "free

13 of charge." (!d.) Regional Director McFadden concluded that"[o]ur review

14 reveals the institution is meeting your needs." (!d.)

15

89. On July 28, 2010, Bryant submitted a BP-11 regarding his retaliatory

16 transfer. In that BP-11, Bryant said that his prior requests for auxiliary aids have

17 been refused and his need for those auxiliary aids has not been remedied (the

18 "Retaliatory Transfer BP-11"). (BP-11, July 28, 2010 (attached as Ex. 57).)

19 Bryant then repeated the same language from his Retaliatory Transfer BP-9 and

20 Retaliatory Transfer BP-1 0, which included requests for his transfer not to interfere

21 with his completion of the administrative remedy process and for auxiliary aids for

22 his disability. (See~~ 79, 85, supra.)

23

90. On September 9, 2010, the BOP notified Bryant that it had granted

24 itself an extension until September 27,2010, by which to respond to Bryant's BP-

25 11 regarding his retaliatory transfer. Bryant's counsel followed up with the BOP's

26 Central Office on October 29 and November 2, 2010, and was told to expect its

27 response in four to six weeks. As of the date of this filing, the BOP has still not

28 responded.

-33-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 35 of 372 Page ID #:38

1

Bryant is Sent to the SHU

2

91. On July 23, 2010, Bryant was sent to the SHU, where, among other

3 restrictions, he has very limited access to a TTY and no access to a videophone

4 despite the fact that hearing prisoners in the same position, upon information and

5 belief, have bi-weekly access to telephones. Due to communication barriers

6 stemming from USP Victorville's refusal to provide Bryant with a qualified ASL

7 interpreter, Bryant also is unaware as to why he was transferred to the SHU.

8

92. On July 29, 2010, Bryant's counsel asked Bryant's unit manager,

9 Mark Tipton, why Bryant was in the SHU. Unit Manager Tipton said that he could

10 not reveal that information until Bryant signed a release form. Upon receiving

11 such a form, however, Unit Manager Tipton told Bryant's counsel on August 6,

12 2010, that he still could not reveal the reason for Bryant's SHU status. Unit

13 Manager Tipton also claimed that Bryant "knows why he is in the SHU" because,

14 according to Unit Manager Tipton, Bryant writes and reads lips "very well." Unit

15 Manager Tipton said that Bryant could write to his attorneys to explain why he is

16 in the SHU. When Bryant's counsel reiterated that Bryant did not know why he is

17 in the SHU, Unit Manager Tipton said he would ask Bryant whether Bryant knew

18 why he was in the SHU.

19

93. On that same day, Unit Manager Tipton exchanged handwritten notes

20 with Bryant. Through these notes, Unit Manager Tipton asked if Bryant had

21 requested placement in the SHU "for [his] own protection." (Handwritten Notes,

22 Aug. 6, 2010 (attached as Ex. 58) at 358.)

23

24

25

26

27

28

-34-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 36 of 372 Page ID #:39

1 Bryant responded,

2

No. Lt's office was get me go to SHU then I don't

understand that why. Lt's office said that compound

3

danger call me. I said stop Frivolous and Malicious.

4

Also I never never trouble with everything by compound danger.

5 (Id. at 358.) Unit Manager Tipton wrote to Bryant that he was in the SHU "under a

6 Protective Custody Investigation" and that he would tell his superiors that Bryant

7 "want[s] to go to Compound." (Jd. at 359.)

8

94. In a second handwritten exchange on August 11, 2010, Unit Manager

9 Tipton wrote to Bryant that "[s]omeone dropped a note on you saying you had to

10 go to SHU. SIS [Special Investigative Support] has to investigate it."

11 (Handwritten notes, Aug. 11, 2010 (attached as Ex. 59).) Neither Unit Manager

12 Tipton nor Warden Quintana explained to Bryant or his counsel the details of the

13 SIS investigation or the identity of the prisoner who said Bryant should be placed

14 in the SHU.

15

95. In an August 17,2010 letter to Warden Quintana, Bryant's counsel

16 explained that USP Victorville. seemed to be under the mistaken impression that

17 Bryant requested that he be moved to the SHU and that this apparent

18 miscommunication would not have occurred if USP Victorville had provided 19 Bryant with a qualified ASL interpreter as required under the Rehabilitation Act. 20 The letter requested that Bryant be moved back to the general population (Letter to 21 Warden Quintana, Aug. 17, 2010 (attached as Ex. 60).) As of the date of this 22 filing, Warden Quintana has not responded to this letter, nor has Bryant been 23 moved back to the general population. No hearing has ever been held to address 24 Bryant's status in the SHU.

25

96. On October 7, 2010, Bryant was scheduled to meet with a hearing

26 specialist in order to fit him for new hearing aids. On that date, Bryant notified his

27 CO that he had a medical appointment, but his CO refused to permit him to leave

28 his cell. Bryant's CO never attempted to explain, in a medium Bryant could

-35-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 37 of 372 Page ID #:40

1 understand, why Bryant was not allowed to keep his medical appointment. It is

2 thus unclear whether the CO knew that the appointment had been cancelled, for

3 example, or he simply did not want to unlock Bryant's cell and take him to the

4 hearing specialist. In all events, as of the date of this filing there have been no

5 further attempts to fit Bryant for new hearing aids.

6

97. In November 2010, Bryant saw the doctor at USP Victorville because

7 he was having trouble sleeping. The doctor refused to prescribe Bryant medication

8 for his insomnia. Bryant understood that the doctor would not treat him because

9 Bryant was about to be transferred to another prison.

10

98. In early December 2010, Bryant asked Unit Manager Tipton for

11 access to the TTY available to inmates in the SHU. Unit Manager Tipton refused

12 Bryant's request and showed Bryant a piece of paper which, among other things,

13 had the word "transfer" written on it. Bryant understood Tipton to be implying

14 that he was refusing Bryant's request for access to the TTY because Bryant was

15 about to be transferred. As of the date of this filing, Bryant has not been

16 transferred to another prison, nor officially notified that he will be transferred in

17 the future.

18

CLAIMS FOR RELIEF

19

COUNT I: DISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF A DISABILITY IN

20

VIOLATION OF THE REHABILITATION ACT AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS(29 U.S.C. § 794 ET SEQ. AND 5 U.S.C. § 703)

21

99. Bryant realleges and incorporates by reference each and every

22 allegation above as if fully set forth herein.

23

100. Bryant is deaf and as such is a qualified individual with a disability

24 within the meaning of the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. § 705(20).

25

101. The BOP is an executive agency within the meaning of29 U.S.C.

26 § 794(a).

27

102. The operations of the BOP, including the departments, agencies,

28 programs and instrumentalities at USP Victorville such as Health Services,

-36-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 38 of 372 Page ID #:41

1 Psychology Services, Sex Offender Management and Treatment, Drug Abuse 2 Treatment, the Education Department and its associated programs, Vocational and 3 Occupational Training programs, Inmate Skills Development Initiative, and work 4 programs such as Federal Prison Industries, are "program[s] or activit[ies] 5 conducted by an Executive Agency" within the meaning of 29 U.S.C. 6 §§ 794(b)(l)(A)-(B) and/or (b)(2)(B).

7

103. At all times relevant to this action, the Rehabilitation Act was in full

8 force and effect in the United States, and Bryant had and has a right not to be

9 subjected to discrimination on the basis of his disability by defendants. 29 U.S.C.

10 § 794(a).

11

104. The purpose of the Rehabilitation Act is to ensure that no "qualified

12 individual with a disability ... shall, solely by reason of[] disability, be excluded

13 from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to

14 discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance

15 or under any program or activity conducted by any Executive agency ...." 29

16 U.S.C. § 794(a).

17

105. The Department of Justice's regulations implementing the

18 Rehabilitation Act clarifies that the BOP and all its activities are "program[s] or

19 activit[ies] conducted by an Executive Agency" of the United States government,

20 and that "the agency shall furnish appropriate auxiliary aids where necessary to

21 afford a handicapped person an equal opportunity to participate in, and enjoy the

22 benefits of, a program or activity conducted by the agency." 28 C.F.R. §

23 39.160(a)(l). The Department of Justice's regulations implementing the

24 Rehabilitation Act additionally mandate that "[i]n determining what type of

25 auxiliary aid is necessary, the agency shall give primary consideration to the

26 requests of the handicapped person." 28 C.F.R. § 39.160(a)(1)(i) (emphasis

27 added).

28

-37-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 39 of 372 Page ID #:42

1

106. Auxiliary aids include, but are not limited to, interpreters and

2 telecommunication devices for deaf persons (TDDs). 28 C.F.R. § 39.103.

3

107. Defendants have discriminatorily impaired and continue to

4 discriminatorily impair Bryant's ability to communicate effectively with medical

5 staff and healthcare providers, including mental health professionals and

6 pharmacists; educational and vocational instructors and his fellow students; work

7 program managers and coordinators and his fellow employees; COs; and other

8 members of prison staff. Furthermore, Defendants have excluded and continue to

9 exclude Bryant from educational and vocational programs, television with closed-

10 captioning, and prison-wide alarms and announcements. Defendants have done

11 this by failing to provide appropriate auxiliary aids to Bryant in violation of the

12 Rehabilitation Act.

13

108. Defendants' failure to provide to Bryant appropriate auxiliary aids and

14 services to ensure effective communication has denied and continues to deny

15 Bryant, on the basis of his deafness, the same access to Defendants' services,

16 benefits, activities, programs and privileges as is afforded to hearing individuals.

17

109. The failure to provide appropriate auxiliary aids and services to ensure

18 effective communication, and the failure to provide comparable access to services,

19 benefits, activities, programs and privileges are policies, regular practices and/or

20 customs of Defendants. These failures are ongoing and continue to this date.

21

110. Defendants have continually failed to provide Bryant with a qualified

22 ASL interpreter and other reasonable auxiliary aids for his deafness resulting in

23 Bryant being:

24

•

unable to communicate effectively with healthcare providers and mental health professionals, raise medical issues, discuss

25

mental health problems, or understand the treatments and

medications tliey prescribe;

26

27

•

excluded from participating in the same educational, vocational, an.d rehabilitation classes and work programs as hearing

28

pnsoners;

-38-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 40 of 372 Page ID #:43

• deprived of knowledge of prison-wide safety or emergency announcements;

2

• deprived of knowledge of prison counts, meals and other

3

important daily activities;

4

• unable to communicate effectively with COs;

5

• subject to disciplinary action stemming from Defendants'
refUsal to accommodate his deafness;

6

• attacked by other inmates for attempting to activate closed-

7

captioning on the television in his unit;

8

• prevented from contacting family, friends and his counsel; and

9

• confined to the SHU, often for indefinite periods of time.

10

111. As a proximate result of Defendants' violations of the Rehabilitation

11 Act, Bryant has suffered, and continues to suffer, discrimination, unequal

12 treatment, exclusion (including exclusion from Defendants' services, benefits,

13 activities, programs and privileges), financial loss, loss of dignity, frustration,

14 humiliation, emotional pain and suffering, anxiety, trauma, embarrassment,

15 unnecessary loss of rights and privileges, including unnecessary disciplinary

16 measures, segregation and lockdown, and serious injury to his health and mental

17 health, including the injuries specified herein.

18

112. Defendants' failure to comply with the Rehabilitation Act has resulted

19 in harm to Bryant, and Defendants are liable to Bryant for harms suffered.

20 Defendants' failure to comply with the Rehabilitation Act will continue to result in

21 harm to Bryant, as Bryant will be in the custody or supervision of the BOP for the

22 rest of his life and will continue to attempt to use the services, benefits, activities,

23 programs and privileges provided by Defendants and to which he is entitled. This

24 harm will continue unless and until Defendants are ordered by this Court to modify

25 their policies, practices and procedures as demanded by the Rehabilitation Act.

26

27

28

-39-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 41 of 372 Page ID #:44

COUNT II: VIOLATION OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION

PROHIBITION OF CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT

2

AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS (EIGHTH AMENDMENT)

3

113. Bryant realleges and incorporates by reference each and every

4 allegation above as if fully set forth herein.

5

114. Under the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States,

6 "[e]xcessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and

7 unusual punishments inflicted."

8

115. Defendants deprived and continue to deprive Bryant of his right to be

9 free from cruel and unusual punishment as guaranteed by the Eighth Amendment.

10

116. Defendants have systematically denied Bryant access to basic human

11 services and vital information during his incarceration. Defendants have failed to

12 notify Bryant of prison alerts, announcements and safety instructions. They have

13 refused to provide Bryant with functioning hearing aids and batteries for those

14 devices. Moreover, they have failed to provide the means of effective

15 communication, including the services of a qualified ASL interpreter, to allow

16 Bryant to understand and communicate with medical staff and healthcare

17 providers, including mental health professionals and pharmacists, COs, and other

18 members of prison staff.

19

117. As a result of these failures, amongst other things, Bryant has, been

20 given completely unnecessary psychopharmacological drugs that were prescribed

21 because Bryant was unable to communicate effectively with medical staff and

22 mental health care professionals. (See, e.g., ~,-r 35, 42, 43, 46, supra.)

23

118. Bryant is also continuously subjected to dangerous living conditions

24 where he is vulnerable to assault and other hazards, and unable to protect himself

25 from these hazards or communicate his need for assistance and protection.

26

119. Defendants have knowledge of the unconstitutional condition to

27 which Bryant was, and continues to be, subject. Bryant submitted numerous

28 written complaints to USP Victorville staff, Warden Quintana, and to the BOP's

-40-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 42 of 372 Page ID #:45

1 Western Regional and Central Offices requesting that qualified ASL interpreters 2 and other auxiliary aids and services be made available to him so that he can 3 understand and effectively communicate with medical staff and healthcare 4 providers, including mental health professionals and pharmacists, COs, and other 5 members of prison staff. Bryant submitted similar written complaints to USP 6 Hazelton, USP .Coleman I, and the BOP's Mid-Atlantic and Southeast Regional 7 Offices.

8
9

COUNPTRI IOI : H mViITOILOANT IOOFNCORFUTEHL EANUDNIUTNEDUSSUTAALTEPSU NC IOSNHSMTEI TNUTT I O N AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS

10

(EIGHTH AMENDMENT)

11

120. Furthermore, Defendants' deliberate and knowing refusal to provide

12 means of effective communication, including the services of a qualified ASL

13 interpreter, to allow Bryant to understand and communicate with medical staff and

14 healthcare providers, including mental health professionals and pharmacists,

15 educational and vocational instructors, COs, and other members of prison staff,

16 combined with Defendants' refusal to provide Bryant with working individual

17 hearing devices and batteries for those devices, have kept, and continue to keep,

18 Bryant in solitary confinement.

19

121. Defendants compound these deprivations by repeatedly placing

20 Bryant in the SHU for indefinite periods of time, thereby further isolating him

21 from his fellow inmates and depriving him of the privileges which he would enjoy

22 as part of the prison's general population, including regular telephone (or, in

23 Bryant's case, videophone or TTY) access.

24

122. Defendants' refusal to provide Bryant an interpreter for educational

25 activities ensures that Bryant's limited English language skills remain as they are,

26 keeping him in a position where he is unable to communicate with COs, other

27 members of prison staff and his fellow inmates, thereby furthering his isolation.

28

-41-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 43 of 372 Page ID #:46

1

123. Additionally, by punishing him for requesting the auxiliary aids to

2 which he is entitled, Defendants have shown other deaf or hearing impaired 3 inmates with whom he might otherwise communicate that it is to their advantage to 4 accept the status quo, not seek auxiliary aids for themselves and not communicate

5 with Bryant.

6

124. Defendants' failure to comply with the Eighth Amendment has

7 resulted in harm to Bryant, and will continue to do so, as Bryant will remain in the

8 custody of the Bureau of Prisons and continue to attempt to avail himself of

9 medical treatment, and will remain in solitary confinement, unless and until

10 Defendants are ordered by this Court to modify their policies, practices and

11 procedures pursuant to the Eighth Amendment.

12 COUNT IV: VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED

STATES DUE PROCESS AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS

13

(FIFTH AMENDMENT)

14

125. Bryant realleges and incorporates by reference each and every

15 allegation above as if fully set forth herein.

16

126. Under the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States,

17 "[n]o person ... shall ... be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due

18 process of law."

19

127. The Fifth Amendment guarantees the right to be free from unwanted

20 medical treatment, including the right to be treated only with one's informed

21 consent.

22

128. Defendants have systematically denied Bryant the means of effective

23 communication, including the services of a qualified ASL interpreter, which are

24 necessary to allow Bryant to understand and communicate with medical staff and

25 healthcare providers, including mental health professionals and pharmacists.

26 Without these auxiliary aids, Bryant was and is unable to understand, and thus give

27 his informed consent to, any and all medical treatment, including psychological

28 treatment, to which he has been subjected by Defendants and their employees.

-42-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 44 of 372 Page ID #:47

1

129. Defendants' failure to comply with the Fifth Amendment has resulted

2 in harm to Bryant, and will continue to do so, as Bryant will remain in the custody

3 of the BOP and will continue to be subjected to medical treatment, including

4 psychological treatment, to which he has not given his informed consent, unless

5 and until Defendants are ordered by this Court to modify their policies, practices

6 and procedures pursuant to the Fifth Amendment.

7

130. The Fifth Amendment guarantees that an individual will not be

8 deprived of life, liberty or property without notice and the opportunity for a

9 hearing.

10

131. Since July 23, 2010, Bryant has been held in the SHU at USP

11 Victorville. While in the SHU, Bryant has been deprived of privileges that he

12 would normally enjoy as a member of the general population, including, amongst

13 other things, regular TTY access. Because Bryant is already isolated due to

14 Defendants' failure to provide auxiliary aids and other services required by federal

15 law, his placement in the SHU is an even more serious disruption to the ordinary

16 incidents of prison life than would be disciplinary or administrative segregation for

17 a hearing inmate.

18

132. Defendants have failed to notify Bryant, with the aid of a qualified

19 ASL interpreter, of the reason for his detention. Written messages passed to

20 Bryant by Unit Manager Tipton do not constitute an adequate method of

21 communication. Nor have Defendants afforded Bryant a status hearing.

22 Defendants' failure to comply with the Fifth Amendment has resulted in harm to

23 Bryant, and will continue to do so, unless Defendants are ordered by this Court to

24 notify Bryant, with the aid of a qualified ASL interpreter, of the reason he is being

25 held in the SHU and to afford him the opportunity for a status hearing.

26

27

28

-43-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 45 of 372 Page ID #:48

COUNT V: VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED

STATES FREEDOM OF SPEECH AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS

2

(FIRST AMENDMENT)

3

133. Bryant realleges and incorporates by reference each and every

4 allegation above as if fully set forth herein.

5

134. Under the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States,

6 "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech."

7

135. Defendants have violated the First Amendment by retaliating against

8 Bryant for the purpose of interfering with his efforts to secure the rights to which

9 he is entitled under federal law. Defendants transferred Bryant from USP Hazelton

10 to USP Coleman I and from USP Coleman I to USP Victorville. These transfers

11 were substantially motivated by their desire to frustrate Bryant's proper exhaustion

12 of the administrative remedy process and thus to prevent his access to the court

13 system. Defendants' decision to transfer Bryant had no legitimate purpose (~ _,

14 supra), but instead was intended to moot Bryant's claims under the Rehabilitation 15 Act and the Constitution and to make impossible his timely appeal of Defendants' 16 rejections of his requests for reasonable auxiliary aids(~_, supra).

17

136. Defendants have also repeatedly placed Bryant in the SHU-often

18 indefinitely and without communicating to Bryant the basis for his confinement

19 there-following his attempts to utilize the administrative remedy process.

20 Defendants' placement of Bryant in the SHU was and is substantially motivated by

21 their desire to frustrate his proper exhaustion of the administrative remedy process 22 and thus to prevent his access to the court system. Defendants' decisions to place 23 Bryant in the SHU had and has no legitimate purpose, but instead was and is

24 intended to discourage Bryant from further requesting administrative remedies and 25 to obstruct communication with his attorneys.

26

137. Defendants' failure to comply with the First Amendment of the

27 Constitution of the United States has resulted in harm to Bryant and will continue

28 to do so. Defendants will continue to confine Bryant in the SHU and to transfer

-44-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 46 of 372 Page ID #:49

1 Bryant from prison to prison as retaliation for his use of the administrative remedy

2 process unless and until they are ordered by this Court to modify their policies, 3 practices and procedures pursuant to the First Amendment.

4 5

COUNT VI:
STATES

VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED FREEDOM OF SPEECH AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS

(FIRST AMENDMENT)

6

138. Defendants have further impermissibly deprived, and continue to

7 deprive, Bryant of his First Amendment right of freedom of speech by failing to

8 provide him with telecommunication equipment necessary for him to communicate

9 with people outside of USP Victorville.

10

139. Hearing inmates at USP Victorville have telecommunication

11 equipment that allows communication with people outside of USP Victorville.

12

140. Defendants' refusal to provide Bryant with telecommunication

13 equipment to ensure the same level of access as hearing inmates serves no 14 legitimate or compelling penological need and is not rationally related or narrowly 15 tailored to any identified penological need.

16

141. Because Bryant is housed in a remote area far from his family's

17 residence in Washington, DC, and does not communicate effectively in written or

18 spoken English, written correspondence and personal visits are not adequate

19 alternatives for exercising his First Amendment right to communicate with friends 20 and family.

21

142. Provision of appropriate telecommunication equipment to Bryant

22 would have negligible effects, if any, on other inmates and prison employees at 23 USP Victorville.

24

143. Defendants' failure to comply with the First Amendment of the

25 United States Constitution has resulted and will continue to result in harm to

26 Bryant, unless and until they are ordered by this Court to modify their policies,

27 practices and procedures.

28

-45-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 47 of 372 Page ID #:50

1

PRAYERFORRELIEF

2

WHEREFORE, Bryant respectfully requests:

3

A. The Court adjudge and decree that Defendants, by the organizations,

4 systems, policies, practices and conditions described above, have violated and

5 continue to violate Section 794 of the Rehabilitation Act and the Constitution of

6 the United States;

7

B. The Court enter such injunctive and/or declaratory relief pursuant to

8 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 and 2202, and Rules 57 and 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil

9 Procedure against Defendants and in favor of Bryant as it deems appropriate to

10 remedy past violations of the laws of the United States and to prevent future

11 violations of the same, including but not limited to an order preventing Defendants

12 from transferring Bryant for the purpose of evading their legal obligations to

13 accommodate Bryant's deafness, and the reasonable auxiliary aids which Bryant

14 requested throughout the administrative remedy process:

15

• access to qualified ASL inteiJ>reter services to ensure effective

16

communication with medical and mental healthcare professionals, educational and vocational instructors, work

17

progJ;am managers and coordinators, COs, and other members of prison staff;

18

•

a '(ibrati.r~g pager or other ~uxiliary aid to inform Bryant of

19

pnson-wtde alarms and daily announcements;

20

• functioning hearing aid batteries on an as-needed basis;

21

• access to appropriate and effective telecommunication, such as
a TTY andvideophone; and

22

• safe access to television with closed-captioning;

23

c. In the alternative, the Court enter such injunctive relief against

24 Defendants transferring Bryant to a prison with the proven ability to accommodate

25 deaf inmates such as Bryant;

26

D. Judgment be entered against Defendants in favor of Bryant for the

27 costs of litigation, including reasonable attorneys' fees under 28 U.S.C. §

28 2412(d)(l)(A);

-46-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 48 of 372 Page ID #:51

1

E. The Court retain jurisdiction of this matter until Defendants

2 demonstrate that they have fully complied with the orders of this Court, and that 3 there is a reasonable assurance that Defendants will continue to comply in the

4 future absent continuing jurisdiction; and

5

F. The Court award Bryant any further relief that the Court deems

6 appropriate.

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14 15 16

17 18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25 26

27

28

-47-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 49 of 372 Page ID #:52

1

2

Bryant, through his counsel and pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure

3 38(b), hereby demands a trial by jury on all claims so triable in this action.

4 Dated: January 7, 20 11

5

Respectfully submitted,

6

7

8 9

ADAMS. PARIS (SBN 190693)
\tOarRisP~s.uCllUcLroVmE.cRom(SBN 271868)
culverr@sullcrom.com

10

1888 Century Park East, Suite 2100
Los Angeles~ California 90067

Tel.: (310) 112-6600

11

Fax: (310) 712-8800

12

MATTHEWS. FITZWATER

13

(foirtozwhaatcevrimc~esauplpllcircoamti.ocnofmorthcoming)

14

tiMOTHE G.P. LETSON
(oro hac vice application forthcoming)

fetsont sullcrom.com

15 16

New

Yroora ~

treet na New York

Floor 10004-2498

Tel.: (21L) 558-4000

17

Fax: (212) 558-3588

18

DEBORAH GOLDEN (oro hac vice application forthcoming)

19

Deborah Golden@washlaw.org Washington La\V)'~rs' Com.tn1ttee for

20

Civil Rights and Urban Affairs
11 Dupont Circle, N.W/Suite 400

21

Washington, DC 2003o

Tel.:

(202)319-1000

22

Fax:

(202) 319-1010

23

Attorneys for PlaintiffDavid Bryant

24

25

26

27

28

-48-

COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 50 of 372 Page ID #:53
EXHIBITS
EXHIBITS 49

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 51 of 372 Page ID #:54

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXHIBIT

PAGE

Ex. 1 Lachance Performance Evaluation, Nov. 9, 2006 ................................................................ 53

Ex. 2 Incident Report, June 28, 2007 ...................................... ., ..................................................... 55

Ex. 3 Inmate Request to Staff, Oct. 17, 2007 .....,..........................................................................58

Ex. 4 BP-8, Oct. 17 2007 ............................................................................................................... 60

Ex. 5 Inmate Request to Staff Response, Nov. 3, 2007 .................................................................62

Ex. 6 BP-8, Dec. 21, 2007 .............................................................................................................65

Ex. 7 BP-8, Dec. 21, 2007 .............................................................................................................67

Ex. 8 Inmate Request to Staff Disposition, June 4, 2008 ..............................................................69

Ex. 9 BP-9, June 4, 2008 ................................................................................................................ 71

Ex. 10 BP-10, June 11, 2008..........................................................................................................73

Ex.11 BP-11,June 11,2008..........................................................................................................75

Ex. 12 BP-9, Oct. 1, 2008 .............................................................................................................. 77

Ex. 13 BP-9, Oct. 7, 2008 .............................................................................................................. 79

Ex. 14 BP-9, Oct. 20, 2008 ............................................................................................................ 81

Ex. 15 BP-8, Nov. 6, 2008 and Response, Nov. 21, 2008 ............................................................. 83

Ex. 16 BP-9, Nov. 9, 2008 ............................................................................................................. 85

Ex. 17 BP-9, Nov. 9, 2008 ............................................................................................................. 87

Ex. 18 BP-10, Dec. 16,2008 ......................................................................................................... 89

Ex. 19 BP-11, Jan. 20, 2009...........................................................................................................91

Ex. 20 BP-11 Responses, Feb. 5, 2009 ..........................................................................................93

Ex. 21 Letter to Warden Cross, July 24, 2009 ...............................................................................96

Ex. 22 BP-8s, July 30, 2009 ........................................................................................................... 99

Ex. 23 BP-8 Responses, Aug. 12, 2009 ....................................................................................... 107
EXHIBITS

50

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 52 of 372 Page ID #:55

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXHIBIT

PAGE

Ex. 24 Letter to Warden Cross and Attached BP-9s, Aug. 18, 2009 ........................................... 120

Ex. 25 Warden Cross Letter, Aug. 31,2009 (without enclosures) ..............................................142

Ex. 26 Letter to Kim White, Regional Director of the BOP's Mid Atlantic Regional Office and Attached P-1 Os, Sept. 27, 2009 ................................. 145

Ex. 27 White Letter, Oct. 8, 2009 ................................................................................................ 177

Ex. 28 Martin E. Comas, "Coleman Prison On Lockdown After Fight," Orlando Sentinel, Oct. 16, 2009 ...................................................................................... 180

Ex. 29 BP-9s, Nov. 3, 2009 ......................................................................................................... 182

Ex. 30 BP-9 Responses, Nov. 6, 2009 ......................................................................................... 185

Ex. 31 Letter to Warden Middlebrooks, Nov. 3, 2009 ................................................................ 190

Ex. 32 Middlebrooks Response, Nov. 10, 2009 (without enclosures) ......................................... 193

Ex. 33 Email from Campbell, Dec. 10, 2009 ...............................................................................195

Ex. 34 Email from Campbell, Jan. 12, 2010 ................................................................................197

Ex. 35 Email from Campbell, Jan. 20, 2010 ................................................................................200

Ex. 36 BP-8s, Jan. 21,2010 and Responses, Jan. 22, 2010 .........................................................203

Ex. 37 BP-9s, Feb. 4, 2010 ..........................................................................................................212

Ex. 38 BP-9 Responses, Feb. 11, 2010 ........................................................................................229

Ex. 39 Letter to Warden Middlebrooks, Feb. 25, 2010 ...............................................................238

Ex. 40 BP-9 Response, Feb. 22, 2010..........................................................................................241

Ex. 41 BP-9 Responses, Feb. 24, 2010 ........................................................................................244

Ex. 42 BP-9 Response, Feb. 25, 2010..........................................................................................253

Ex. 43 BP-lOs, Mar. 11, 2010......................................................................................................256

Ex. 44 BP-10 Response, Mar. 15, 2010 .......................................................................................283

EXHIBITS 51

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 53 of 372 Page ID #:56

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXHIBIT

PAGE

Ex. 45 Letter to Warden Norwood, Mar. 22, 2009 ......................................................................286

Ex. 46 BP-9, Apr. 1, 2010............................................................................................................290

Ex. 47 BP-lls, Apr. 18, 2010 ......................................................................................................292

Ex. 48 BP-11 Response, May 7, 2010 .........................................................................................323

Ex. 49 BP-10 Response, Apr. 23,2010 .......................................................................................326

Ex. 50 BP-11 Response, May 7, 2010 .........................................................................................329

Ex. 51 BP-10 Response, Apr. 27,2010 ...................................................................................... .332

Ex. 52 BP-11 Response, May 7, 2010 .........................................................................................335

Ex. 53 BP-10, May 4, 2010..........................................................................................................338

Ex. 54 BP-9 Response, May 4, 2010 ...........................................................................................341

Ex. 55 BP-10 May 24, 2010.........................................................................................................344

Ex. 56 BP-10 Response, Jun. 30, 2010 ........................................................................................348

Ex. 57 BP-11, Jul. 28,2010 .........................................................................................................351

Ex. 58 Handwritten Notes, Aug. 6, 2010 .....................................................................................357

Ex. 59 Handwritten Notes, Aug. 11, 2010 ...................................................................................360

Ex. 60 Letter to Warden Quintana, Aug. 17, 2010 ......................................................................362

EXHIBITS
52

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 54 of 372 Page ID #:57
EXHIBIT 1

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 55 of 372 Page ID #:58

PDS Print All Docwnents

Page 5 of 15

\0 ~

BOPSeal

**SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED**
Federal Bureau of Prisons Psychology Data System

Date-Title: 11-09-2006- GRP CLOSED [33] Hearing Impaired Drug Ed Corr. Course Reg Number-Name: 06704-016- BRYANT, DAVID Unit/Qtrs: C, C01-123L
Facilitator: MARY N. LACHANCE, DRUG ABUSE TRTMNT SPECLST Institution: HAZ -HAZELTON USP

'I

Status: COMPLETED Enroll- End Date: 11-09-2006- 03-14-2007
Total Hours: 28.5

SESSION DATA:

Number of Sessions: 7 First-Last Session: 12-01-2006- 03-01-2007

ID TITLE

DATE

OUR ATTEND PART HMWK

7 test

03-01-2007 90 C

G

N

6 session 6/7 02-07-2007 240 C

G

N

5 Session 4&5 01-24-2007 240 C

G

N

4 Session 3

01-03-2007 360 C

G

N

3 Session 3

12-20-2006 360 C

G

N

2 Session II 12-06-2006 360 C

G

N

1 Session I & II 12-01-2006 60 C

G

S

Attendance Complete Incomplete Excused Incomplete Unexcused Absent Excused Absent Unexcused Expelled

100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Participation Good Fair Poor N/A

100.0% 0.0 % 0.0% 0.0%

Homework Satisfactory Unsatisfactory N/A

TEST DATA:

Id Title

Type Date of Test Score

2 First Retest Posttest 03-14-2007 76

1 Test I

Posttest 03-01-2007 48%

COMMENTS:

14.29% 0.0%
85.71%

12/01/06 Met with him for the first time since he began. Unable to meet with him due to lockdowns/ foul weather or staff scheduling. He completed the majority of his written assignments but it is clear that he has difficulty understanding the concepts. Communication between him and staff is conducted through written medium.
**SENSmVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED**

EXHIBIT 1 54
file://C:\Docwnents and Settings\MXR3122\Local Settings\Temp\Bryant, D. 06704-016.htm 6/2/2008

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 56 of 372 Page ID #:59
EXHIBIT 2

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 57 of 372 Page ID #:60

'3?-S2S8. 052
U. S. DE.I?ARTMEN·r OF ;..-uSTICE

INCIDENT REPORT

CJFRM ;1.li.Y 1994 ~-E:DERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS

1. ~arne Of Institution: 'JSP Hazelton
2. Name Of Inmate Bryant, uavid

-------

Part 1 - Incident Report

3. Register Number 4. Date Of I:1cident

06704-016

June 27, 2007

15. Time 5:40pm

6. Place Of Incident Front door of C-1

7. Assignment C-1 Ord

B. Unit
C-1

9. Incident Threatening another with bodily harm or any other offense Insolence towards a staff member

10. Code

11., r;esc~iption Of I::1cident (Date: June 27,2007 Time: ~ Staff become a1-1are of

1nc.l.aent1

On June 21,2007 at approximately 5:40pm ,while observing the mainline move in

front of C-1, inmate Bryant, David #06704-016 had missed the move to go to mainline.

Inmate Bryant asked me to allow him to go to mainline. I informed inmate Bryant that ~he

mainline move was over and he could not leave the housing unit. Inmate Bryant then

stated he was hungry. I told inmate Bryant that there was nothing I could do. Inmate

Bryant pointed in my face almost striking my nose and said,"Fuck you!" Approximately 15

minutes later inmate Bryant came to my office saying something I could not understand. I

asked him to write his thought on paper. Inmate Bryant wrote "I will destroy your

office." End of report.

a.-_

··

:2. S.i..g,._n.. ature
.-')

Date d Time 13. Name And Title (Printed) June .;Hr, 2007 D. Mayle Correctional Officer 7:50pm

Above Inmate By

15. Date Incident 16.tirne Incident Report Delivered Report Delivered

Part II - Committee Action 17. Comments Of Inmate To Co~ittee Regarding Above Incident
Tn,-,k. d.tv.. )......._~ ~f ~

l8vrA. It Is The Finding Of 7he Committee That You:

3. ~Committed The Following Prohibited Act.

~ Did Not Commit A Prohibited Act.

z_
I

;)4!::; ~

B. _____ The Committee Is
Referring The Charg'e(s) To The DHO For Further Hearing. C. _____ The Committee Advised The Inmate Of Its Finding And Of The Right To File An Appeal Within 1.5 Calendar Days.

19. Committee Decision Is Based On The

~ ~I"-'-

~ a..l ~~

~.~r 61r-. sc..y/L"'-+ s \-.-"; tc., '/ rv-- .......

Following
i'l<\. ._~.. -1
.L s.--, l

Information
~~~ ...f..<:;t yu._;

.z:M~"6 I

,..,..

...._

l

l

20. Committee action and/or recommendation if referred to DHO (Contingent upon DHO

Lr.J finding inmate committed prohibited act)

I

h·::.">oT" 1-dyk....:. "JA.>

~$rl/0 ~1.

A-:>::. ..¥ ~,..,s>7 'i' h.J 5'-",./ I Y" c.cc.y~

21.

Record Copy - Central File Record; Copy - DHO; Copy - Inmate After UDC Action; copy lnma~e Within 24 Hours Of Part I Preparation
EXHIBIT2
56

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 58 of 372 Page ID #:61

Part III - Invesc

Date And Ti" ·nv ~tigation Began

06-28-2007

1541

DSBS2i3ueisl.peUcpnIisonetprmdtlAaiATttneoaAF~AD~lnlrdadPvwiSrinostgaAecgdneTesAOssh.fadOtvRfeYYriTgsooeuuhhetHAInTDareofvieesRrAceCeilnmspocomlaeiinmnInaAitfSrtgoyeiardlmiePnAnersdott:PcT~YeYooshhusoaiutAbBAiYtutroteAeuAdnrAyrSedS/ivlItY ieansngfeocde-rem- OO~ eff dn TYThe oehuraMItRnaYysigtoNihuttoruttTSiBoioleneRnUaecmlseeadiMnTaoy

The Inmate Was Advised Of The Above Right By

At (Date/time)06-2S-2007 1541

24. Inmate Statement And Attitude

Inmate Bryant was advised of hi received a legible copy of this this interview. He made the fo I got mad because r wanted to g

s ri~hts and acknowledged he unde inc~dent report. He displayed a
llowing statement: •r didn't hear
o eat. I was wrong, but I wanted

rstood those rights. good attitude during him call end of move to go eat".

.

He

25. Other Facts About The Incident, Disposition Of Evidence, Etc.

Statements Of Those Persons

Present At Scene,

Note written by inmate Bryant #06704-016.

26. Investigator's Comments And Conclusions

Based on the information and 312-insolence toward

provided in section 11, r find staff, to be valid charges.

the

charges

of

203-threatening,

27. Action Taken

Inmate Bryant remains in Disciplinary Committee.

Special

Housing

pending

further

action

from

his

Unit

Date And Time Investigation completed: ____~Q~6~-~2~S~-~2~0~0w7~--~1~5~4~6------
kgn~ Printed Name/signature Of Inves~tor: __~K~·~M~o~n~t~s~om~·e~rv~-------------------T tle

EXHIBIT2 57

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 59 of 372 Page ID #:62
EXHIBIT 3

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 60 of 372 Page ID #:63

B?-Sl46. 055 INMATE REQUE;..._ '1'0 S'l'AFF CDFRM SEP 98 U. S . DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS

T~ (~;):d~itl~ ;i~~ff Hemberl

FRJ,JO\!id O?Jrv A"''

+ WoORrK ~ASeSIGrNLMvENT:LA~"'IJ

c-1

I

DATE:
/D-t?-7
REGISTER NO.:
Cl <IJ ?o i../-CJ I b
UNIT:
C-1

DISPOSITION:

Signature Staff Me~ber

Record Copy - File; Copy - Inma~a (This form may be replicated via Wl?)
®.-. .u••.,.,.._

This form replaces BP-148. 070 dated Oct: 66 and BP-5148.070 APR 94
EXHIBIT 3 59

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 61 of 372 Page ID #:64
EXHIBIT 4

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 62 of 372 Page ID #:65

INMATE:'S

I A-MD~~

HAZ: 1330. :uA

/C> -/)-?

Date: November 29, 2006 -l-1 ""~ JO '·?

Subject: Administrative Remedy

'tx..5'Jq'1

Program

Page: Attachment A

UNITED STATES PENITENTIARY HAZELTON REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY
INFORMAL RESOLUTION FORM - General Population

Part

Food Svc

Unit Manager __

Busines_, Office

Psychology __

'!rust Fund/Laundry __ Rel::.gio.:.s Servic<u __

Health Services

Correctional Svca

Sate~y ____

ISM/Mailroom/Records

Part C: Informal Resolution Attempt

Issue Resolved./ Relief Granted

Conunents:

Issue Unresolved/ No Reliet Granted
Unable To Address

Comments: Comm'!nts:

Unicor Education Recreation Facilities Administration

!nmate Signature: Staff Signature: Unit Manager'-' Signature:

'!racking I

Event Date

Date:
OatQ:

Counselor's Tracking

+ 2C Days

Form Issued

04te:

BP-9 !ssuect

BP-9 Returned

EXHIBIT 4 61

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 63 of 372 Page ID #:66
EXHIBIT 5

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 64 of 372 Page ID #:67

BP-Sl46. 055 INMATE REQQE.__ TO STAFF CDFRM SEP 98 U. S . DEPARTMENT 01!' JUSTICE

FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS

TO: (Name )."'d Title of Staff Hemberl
~ rtv-· 41! "" \ A-5 ("

DATE:
/O-t?-7

rJ,iOVJd 63r'-t PAll
+ WORK ASSIGNMENT:
o r .:::Je r-L v t.A ~..., 11 C.-/

REGISTER NO. :
D ~zoy-CJ/o
UNIT:
C.-I

I SUBJECT: {Briefly state your question or concern and the so~ut~on you are requesting.

Continue on back, if necessary. Your failure to be specific may result in no action bei~g

taken. I! necessary, you will be interviewed in order to successfully respond to your

you 1 ;r J ,] req>Jest. l

·

?v()cl'A
J2f19L

016/'l't
KevtL

l

~
!tH 9 PN
't?btt+

epcofH2Ld~;uy.:,

i")y~
tJi+b

c~/)lI bC?

7
.

IJr? f-ill/e.

u:>p JJirl'f-:fKce.e+me..

h;r B t+ S\ 1 D.! lf?-h.y v3t9? r

~Cb?{AW\ LOtS fcu.£TrR-f<"J

c.r 7 (?<'.cAi!...,.t:.- flA-trsc_, fLct"1;5rs. s-~:t- ft)-Q.. 7?? +o fZ..c.aL ~)<t:± t-~,"(
Ck:±h:c 9' 0 Ti> &>r~11 Cytl\0 '>;pec&L mc.NUrh ltttLi:Ja E

5o AU.. :>-JAW 1:z d.rcry BMsStN-e..s-2 =tb,'' \A,.:sp ecar-.,"JC.=-<:...7,)

+- -th'A eQc::.-t•vf/, '"']'= to
C 0 T'-\-e..-- A ' {!"' .p(~:f

V'

<m~'!J,:_e=tt":{:h~~rJppoX>

w
;k

,L l
f\lG

r

7

~
.:;-

f )..).<>T
oJ=\srs <r

SeA($"<:
5,1 'i>t

A£

B¥ ll"'\ usp 'H l-. Hs..tH·~ 't'!ll :ttr»t :l''rs:, 1-)r:t,ul +~rae.. MoJ:

lAh\cltt=?+e"rdJt"7 l""D'l Commqoncn/t·'5 St'7N LeNgu4.f=e ibts I±
IJLI- f2r.:op< -c s Arc f?t~~o L~te> t>v: H!'lrJ £ru+re±cJ. N,oT fV\;' FttuL-b :+J-~t<­
\..}Dv..., /CO l"l'\U.C..~ ,1

(Jc not write below this line)

DISPOSITION:

Signature Staff Me~~P.r

Reco~d Copy - File; Copy - In~~e (This form may be replicated via i~P)

This form replaces 6P-l48. 070 dated Oct 86 and BP-5148.070 APR 94

EXHIBIT 5
63

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 65 of 372 Page ID #:68

I~JMATE REQUEST TO STAFF MEMBER RESPONSE

INMATE: Bryant, David REGISTER NUMBER: 06704-016
UNIT C-1

r\LECOY~

This is in response to your Inmate Request to Staff Member, dated October 17, 2007, in which you request assistance with a transfer due to your hearing impairment.

A review of your Medical Care Level indicates you are a Care Level 2 inmate assigned to regular duty with medical restrictions. USP Hazelton is a care Level 2 institution which is capable of handling your medical issues. Taken into consideration your hearing impairment there are no other medical reasons to request a transfer. You are currently a High Security Level inmate with IN custody. You are serving a Life sentence for the offense of 1sc Degree Burglary, 1st Degree Sexual Assault with Aggravated Circumstances. You do not qualify for a lesser security transfer nor does your medical needs dictate a need for a transfer. You have been incarcerated at USP Hazelton since August 3, 2005. Staff at USP Hazelton have worked with you and assisted you in the last 26 months to ensure your legitimate needs are met .

I trust this information adequately addresses your concerns.

EXHIBIT 5
64

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 66 of 372 Page ID #:69
EXHIBIT 6

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 67 of 372 Page ID #:70

HAZ: Date: Subject:
Page:

1330.13A November 29, 2006 Administrative Remedy Program Attachment A

UNITED STATES PENITENTIARY HAZELTON REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY
INFORMAL RESOLUTION FORM - General Population

INMATE'S NAME: David Bryant

Reg. No. 06704016

UNIT: C-1

1. Specific Complaint: This writer is a deaf Man being housed at USP-Hazelton. As a deaf Man, I am unable to QarticiQate in the
Qrograms offered at this facility. I want to Qartici.Qate in the following Qrograms: Adult GED, Adult Continuing Education, and other Qrograms that would further my rehabilitation. Furthermore, although the televisions in this facility are eguiQQed with closed-caQtioning, the other inmates in the facility do not like when it is used because it hides oart of the screen.

2. Relief Requested: I am reguesting that Qrograms be started that I may Qartici.Qate in and also that the television situation be fixed so that I may enjoy watching television. I want to be afforded the same rights and Qrivileges that the hearing inmates are afforded.

Part B: Referred To:

Food Svc - - Business Office

Unit Manager - -
Psychology - -

Unicor - -
Education - -

Trust Fund/Laundry Religious Services

Recreation - -

Health Services
--

Correctional Svcs - - Facilities - -

Safety --

ISM/Mail room/Records
--

Administration
--

Part C: Informal Resolution Attempt

Issue Resolved/ Relief Granted
---
Issue Unresolved/ No Relief Granted

Comments: Comments:

Unable To Address Issue/Referred To:

Comments:

Inmate Signature:

Staff Signature:

Unit Manager's Signature:

Date: Date:

Date:

Tracking #

Event Date

Counselor's Tracking

+ 20 Days

Form Issued

BP-9 Issued

BP-9 Returned

EXHIBITS 66

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 68 of 372 Page ID #:71
EXHIBIT 7

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 69 of 372 Page ID #:72
HAZ: 1330 Date: November 29, 2006 Subject: Administrative Remedy
Program Page: Attachment A
UNITED STATES PENITENTIARY HAZELTON REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY
INFORMAL RESOLUTION FORM - General Population

INMATE'S NAME: David Bryant

REG. NO. 06704016 UNIT: C-1

1. Specific Complaint: On December 21st, 2007, USP-Hazelton went on "Emergency Lock-Down" status. However, it has come to th:t.s wr:t.ter attent:t.on tnat tn:t.s tac:t..l:t.ty 1.s dan2:erous, in that, this writer is handicap without tpe ab:t.ll.ty to hear and respond to
sound as other inmates in the general populatwn.

2. Relief Requested:

I would like to have an OVERRIDE in my point status and

be sent to a medical facility.

Part B: Referred To:

Food Svc

Unit Manager

Business Office - -

Psychology - -

Trust Fund/Laundry __ Religious Services - -

Health Services - -

Correctional Svcs - -

Safety - -

ISM/Mailroom/Records - -

Part C: Informal Resolution Attempt

Issue Resolved/ Relief Granted

Comments:

Unicor
Education - Recreation - Facilities - -
Administration ~

Issue Unresolved/

Comments:

No Relief Granted - -

Unable To Address

Comments:

Issue/Referred To:

Inmate Signature:

Date:

Staff Signature:

Date:

Unit Manager's Signature:

Counselor's Tracking

Tracking #

Event Date

+ 20 Days

Form Issued

Date:

BP-9 Issued

BP-9 Returned

EXHIBIT7 68

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 70 of 372 Page ID #:73
EXHIBIT 8

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 71 of 372 Page ID #:74

BP-Al48.055

TE REQUEST TO STAFF

SE:I" g:_

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS

Member)

c -I UNIT:
SUBJECT: (Briefly state your question or concern and the solution you are requesting. Continue on back, if necessary. Your failure to be specific may result in no action being taken. If necessary, you will be interviewed in order to successfully respond to your

DISPOSITION:

[2., e;i !Jec:./f=
(Do not write below this line)

Date

FILE IN SECTION 6

This form replaces BP-148.070 dated Oct 86 and BP-5148.070 APR 94

S APPROPRIATE FOR PRIVACY FOLDER

SECTION 6

EXHIBIT 8
70

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 72 of 372 Page ID #:75
EXHIBIT 9

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 73 of 372 Page ID #:76

._.~,l-...v... rtu£.K.Al.. i"au!JVN 1NL>US11UES, lNC. U!AVI!HWOI!.11I,ICANSAS

.. U.S. DEPARTMENf OF JUSTICE
Federal Rureau of Prisons '

REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

U." . Type or use ball-point pen. If attachmentS are needed, submit four copit!s. Additional instructions on reverse.

From:&Yn=r-.li:!?utt J):r::.cl D 1 o~zo L(-o/~ c:,-(

LAST N , FIRST, MIDDLE IN1T1AL

REG. NO.

UNIT

~ B- RESPONSE

DATE

WARDEN OR REGIONAL DIRECTOR

"'""In m lftliwJiisjiod with tJUs rnpoRU, you nu>y appul U> 1M R<gioiUII DirocJDr. Your appeoj

r«<ived dl• RogioiUII 0/fiu wilhU. JO CDl4tuJ4r day• ofth• daJ4 oftJW rnponu.

((~!!~~:_~U~~~~~~------------------------:.~:_~_!~~-_: __________ _

Part C- RECEIPT

CASE NUMBER:------

:Return to:

LAST NAME, FIRST, MIDDLE INITIAL

REG. NO.

UNIT

INSTITUTION

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

S~Ecr:

EXHIBIT9 72

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 74 of 372 Page ID #:77
EXHIBIT 10

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 75 of 372 Page ID #:78

U.S. Department of.lultb
Federal Buruu or Pri50l1S

(

Central

3P/O

.,lstrative Remedy Appeal

·.D OfoZtJY-a/6 -/ Lt .5 of'ltHtrz:J7~VJcJI. ~ n-etcJ...!:f¢1\j A L} Type or use baiJ..poilK pen. If llll&Chmenti~W needed. subtnil four copiu.
menta ~ submitted witb Ibis appeal. t

Olle copy each of the compldcd BP-229( 13) and BP-230(13), including any auadt-
/

1

From:

' LAST NAME. FIRST, MIDDLE JN1TlAl..

REO. NO.

UNIT

INS'ITlUTJON

Part B • RESPONSE
()
t
'· .

DATE

GENERAL COUNSEL

--

'-----· ORIGINAL: R-E-TU-R·N-T-O -IN-M-AT·E---·-------------·-·-·--CA·S-EN·U-M-BE-R·: -----------------Part C ·RECEIPT

.

CASENUMBER: - - - - - -

-(ymcr: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Rerum 10: ---~-LA-ST=NA-ME~, F=IRS=T,:MI- DD:LE:IN-mA:L=~­

REO. NO.

UNIT

INsrrn.moN

UPitUIN

DATE

*--

SIGNATURE OP R.ECIPIENT OF CENTRAL OFPICE APPEAL

EXHIBIT 10
74

BP-231(13) JUHE201l12

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 76 of 372 Page ID #:79
EXHIBIT 11

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 77 of 372 Page ID #:80

u.s.~ of J\llllke Pedetal Bureau of Prisolll

(
oft I

Regional Admi.nil '.ive Remedy Appeal

Part B-RESPONSB
C)

OATS

REGIONAL DIRECTOR

If dbadallod widl thla ~ you may appeaiiO the Oeueral Counsel. Your appeal111111t be received in the OeneraJ Counsel'• Office within 30 calendar cJa,. of the dale of this ruponoe.

ORIGINAL: RETURN TO INMATE

CASB NUMBER: - - - - - -

Part C-RECEIFI'

CASE N U M B E R : - - - - - -

______________________________________ V()wmw: ___~~~~~~~--LAST NAMB, FIRST, MIDDLE lNITIAL ~:

REG. NO.

UNIT

fNsmtmON

~----------

USPLVN

DATB

,...,..,... edltlane not ~~Sa~*$.._..._

SIGNATI.IRB, RECIPIENT OP REGIONAL APPEAL

EXHIBIT 11
76

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 78 of 372 Page ID #:81
EXHIBIT 12

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 79 of 372 Page ID #:82

U.S. DEPARTMENT Of JUSTICE

emau Federal

of Prisona

REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

Part 8- RFSPONSE

tU.,.,. OATB
q tlbttltbfW wid! 1/rU ,..,_,., ,_ _, .,..,.,.,

WARDEN OR REGIONAL DIRECTOR
Dltw:lor. YtJWIIPfHtll- N _..,.Ia tlw ~ 0/ftell wldl6t lll.._,..,.o/lh dlaoftltb,........

ORIGINAL: RE11JRN TO INMATE

CASB NUMBBR: - - - - - -

-Part C- RECEIPT .

(__ JJ11 to: .

LAST NAME. FIRST, MIDDLE INITIAL

REO. NO.

CASB N U M B E R : - - - - - -

UNIT

INS11TUTION

EXHIBIT 12
78

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 80 of 372 Page ID #:83
EXHIBIT 13

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 81 of 372 Page ID #:84

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Federal Burelll of Priao111

REQUFSI' FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

Part B- .RESPONSE ·

_)

y_.,_,- calaMr.,. OATB
q tlbariU,/W IPitA 1/tU,....... ,_ ~a~qllfiPidl /#tiN..,._, a - .

WARDEN OR REOJONAL DllU!CTOR

1w _.,_. 1k /lqiMutl Of/b w1t116t Je

oftiN"'* ofIll#,.....,._ ·

ORIGINAL: R£'11JRNTO INMATE

CASB N U M B E R . : - - - - -

·J Part C- RECEIPI'

-~:s;~·-=-=========-

R~ro: --~~~~~~~

LAST NAME, FIRST, MIDDLE lNlTIAL

REO. NO.

UNIT

INSTITUTION

rumcr=------------------------------------------

EXHIBIT 13 80

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 82 of 372 Page ID #:85
EXHIBIT 14

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 83 of 372 Page ID #:86

U.S. DEPARTMENT OP JUSTICE Federal Bureau of Prisons

REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

Part B- RESPONSE
t)

)

,...,._,,...,....,.,to DATB
U~ ll'idl drb

WARDBN OR Rl!OIONAL DIRECTOR
tlu /lqittul~. y_.qpar~_be _...,. tlu ~ 0/lbwtdllal#-..,a,. oftlu.,.afdrb,........

J--O-R-IG-IN-A-L:-RE-11-JR-N-TO-I-NM-A-TE---------.----.---------- CA-SE-N ~~U ~~M --B --E --R --:----------

Part C- RECEIPT
Return to:
rumcr: ____L_AS_T_N_AM_E_, F_IR_S_T._M_ID_D_LB_I_NI_TI_A_L ________RE_O_. N_O_. ________U_N_IT_______I_NS_TI_TU_T_IO_N__

EXHIBIT 14 82

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 84 of 372 Page ID #:87
EXHIBIT 15

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 85 of 372 Page ID #:88

B?-i
rf'1~-J-oi

HAZ: 1330.13A
Date: November 29, 2006 Subject: Administrative Remedy
Program Page: Attachment A
UNITED STATE~ PENITENTIARY RAZELTON

REQUJ!:ST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMimY

INFO~ RESOLUTION FORM - Genera~ Popu~ation

INMATE'S NAME : Oa.vid '\:\\'I C..n;-

REG.

NO Ql;."lOt.\· • 1"')\t:.

UNIT:('?_ -I

1. Specific Complaint: I nrn rl ~a+ o.nrl n ,.,.._..\ .,.,. ...... ~,-..;4.. ,..,.. -+,.,

A

---

\r~~ ,Q:',.,.,..,vek t.-..--..1.-. \._

,<-<!!, ~" ,d .......:. ~~--on ""'"""' ,.,.\......,

., h ... .... - - ........ ....,..C <"L'=.,-..., '.. 0 \,.• " "- .. ...,_V.r. . ~A.·i:>\o

,...,,...,, ~ \

_.c.,.rvil'""-..., -to ""'""""-~6.

2. Relief Requested:

P-.r. i

-:I:: ANVc-'r "' Sc::...... l.J" ,..,.,_ ,,.., ··~ An

('\r"').-... ""~ '~ • ,.... 0.~

~

~

.. \~-\

.\ ·~ ~

, ;,..,._,..... <:>.a:'n..--t-11 •""'~;

Part B: Referred To:

Food Svc

Unit Manager

Business Office

Psychology __

Trust FUnd/Laundry ~th Servicee

Religious Services
£ Correctional Svcs

Safety __

ISM/Mailroom/Records

Unicor
- - Education - - !lecreation - - Facilities
Administration

Part C: Informal Resolution Attempt

Issue Resolved/ Relief Granted
---
Issue unresolved/ ~ief Granted
Unable To Address

Comments:

'1L. Comments: p,J~- .5~~i..jL WI

F'~t.M.

'fh·s t~JL~~~ ~~~~~r c1~ (1.4( c;)Q

-----···· ~
Comments:

------- '---

Issue/Referred To:

Inmate Signature:

... " _,r'\

Staff Siqnature: ~ '~...~: IJ\Jy~ljS

Date: Date:

If/ ?1--d(

Unit Manager's Siqnatur.j: usfp1_~-;.~;;~;~1111HI:l1Taror

Date:

.(

'-"'

Counsel~~s~1¥J~cking

Trackinq t

Event Date

+ 20 Days

Form Issued BP-9 Issued BP-9 Returned

tJ/6/o¥

EXHIBIT 15 84

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 86 of 372 Page ID #:89
EXHIBIT 16

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 87 of 372 Page ID #:90 UNJCQll FEDI!IIAL PlliSOtiiNOUS11UES. INC. - U!AVI!HWOilTII. KANSAS

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

REQUESr FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

Federal Bureau of Priso111
( ' ()~:!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!~~~~~~~~~!1!!!!!!!!!!!!1!!!!!!!!!!!!1!!!!!!!!!!!~~ Type or we ball-point put. If tlttiJdunentl are Meded, submit four copiu. AddiJtoMl instruction~ on r111ene.

().: 0cVAot~ yiJ LASr NAME, r1iST,MiDoL& INI'I1AL

c)b==.O~ -OIC REG. NO.

(! {
UNIT

U.§"P He;. P-o Ita(')
lNSTITU'IlON

Part A- INMATE REQUF.Sr

\ c..o ("'\("\ <:.:>-t- · "'-~ r --t-h e.. a..\a r rr\
C. e.-~ t a \,u.::x;...'{ .s. \ ~('\";- a. eT- rabe
Q \'oc-~"'"'l ("\;~ a.\c..r(Y'.. \" ~'I c~ \ I.

. !l-7-c7

cY'

DATB

B- RESPONSE

~--Di,i?.vL

Sl

OP RBQtJl!STER

0

dtb,........,.._,.,...,,.,.,....... ,_.,..,__ ... DATB
. q~ . . .

~.

WARDBN OR RBOIONAL DDlECTOR

~,.,....,.,.,_OJ/b

:ZOM4n4--;i1j~!!J#~IIfll JqiMIIf.

---cr . ORIGINAL: RETURNTOINMATB

---

CASB NUM8BR: CASBNUMBBR:

fo'i'1Y -F I
-

Part C- RECEIPT

Return to:

LAST NAMB, FIRST, MIDDLB INl'l'lAL

ltEO. NO.

UNIT

INS1Tl'UTION

~=----------------------------------------------------------------

EXHIBIT 16
86

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 88 of 372 Page ID #:91
EXHIBIT 17

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 89 of 372 Page ID #:92

I
( ("".

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

Federal Bureau of Prlsont

(~!!!!!!!!~~~~~~!!!!!!!!~~!!!!!!!!~!!!!!!!I!!!!!!!!~~~!!!!!!!!!!!!~!!!!!!!!!!!!~
1'yp. or us• ball-polnl pm. 1/ attadrtrunu arc Mcded, submit four coplu. Addltlonal ltutnu::tions on reverse.

Part A- INMATE REQUEST

. \ a..""" c\ec...C. o.~ 'f'\eed c..I"\ A. Ol- t ~v-? '\e+e. r- ~ <:;::,

~N'\uf"'\ \ cc.-+e e We c..+t v ~ \y L,....:)r--t-~ he..a..\.t-"" eo~

?rc:::>"' rd.c..r...s \ ?r~s-rc...(Y"\ 9<r~v' d e '('S, '" errru~~

~\e..T"','~ 1 o..t""\cl <:1>\he..r ?<20 '?~ Ga h o
"l;'T'Q ? f'C:>v-t d. e 'P ro"3"\'C(Y"I.::;.- .::::.E!-""' v t ~ -n::, ,

Q~~.;$. -. lf.c'f-.?.l

·.

Part B- RESPONSE
0·

C_,.,...-------==--- DATB
r_..,...,_.. q~lritAIIIII,_..,__,,..,.,._...,_ov.-.

WARDEN OR R.BGlONAL DIRBCTOR l'llftbt4t. ... ..,_,OJ/b,.....»~oJ~~:"":

ORIGINAL: RETURN TO INMATE

.

CASB NUMBER: :::> ll4J D!tl: !:.1_

~c

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ C~BNUMBBR:

. Part C- RECEIPl'

LAST NAMB, FIRST, MIDDLB 1NmAL

REO. NO.

UNIT

INSTITU110N

5~=-------------------------------------------------------------

EXHIBIT 17
88

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 90 of 372 Page ID #:93
EXHIBIT 18

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 91 of 372 Page ID #:94

u.s. o~parlment or Justice

Regional Administrative Remedy Appeal

l'cdcrul Burcuu or Prisons

(

0 ,. . . . . _ - J ,. T··y•pthe tohrisuu.eppbeaalll.-point pen. lr att~~ehments ure needed. su}Jm·11 rouh.o- p•·es. One copy or th· e completed BP-229( 13) includin,. ~ny.a11uchmcnts must be subm.itted

From: ..uC7LrA·SToNA±ME.~RSTL.M.CtD.O.L."EI\N'mAL

~~ (")C feU REG.NO.

~r-)1~/'

I Ul/.1..-

-U.~'? ~~.=.:.L!::::::I.S:~

Part A- REASON FOR APPEAL

NIT

INSTITtmON

.j ClO"\ d.ec..-C +- \\e,.e.d C:...'f"\ ~5L \t"Yt-~?rQ..~c-

e~ =- -1-o C).o M fY1 '>()\ +e

c::n., e..\V u.:> J +-h 1-)czo._l-r-ha>..C..:

vc:.v-. <§.

~ cl.= I ? «::::.q'\'C.r""\ '"? ro"'' Wrs '
C!...\.D 5 ::::;e5 , a.-\e.r •' c_ O..f\e..\ D-t-'r'ler

; "'~c.rnc:S
--peo<p \e

~h.o ?~\.nd~

\(\f'Y\C..~
1~/ID-Oi DATE

Part 8- RESPONSE

RECEIVED

DEC II ZOOS

Blnlu Gl Prflone

----------~MNC~~~~

rJ D~.R~ Ji~~ DATE
Idradyissosarttihsfeieddatwe iothr tthhiiss rreessppoonnssee.. you rnaYllppca110 1he General Counsel. Your appeal muu bo received In the GeRnEeOraJlOCNoAuLnsel's

J

- - - -I-'-~I-u·IV-\- ···O·RI-GI·NA-L;: R:E;TUcRN-T:O-INaMEATCEErn-----~--

CASENUMBER: ....w:;....;...;....._ __:._ __

CASE NUMBER: - - - - - - - - -

SUBJECT=-==---------------------RE-0_._ RdUm~:----I..A-S~T N~AM~B~. A=RS=T.~M~ID-DL-E-iNJ-11-AL---­ -

N--0~.-----~UNIT=~---IN~5~!tl\~n1~0N~-

DATE

SIGNATURB, REClPlENT Of REOJONAL APPEAL

BP·230(13) JUNI! 2002

EXHIBIT 18

90

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 92 of 372 Page ID #:95
EXHIBIT 19

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 93 of 372 Page ID #:96

L-:f' f { 1/?n/<----~ U.S. Department of J~11ce Federal Bureau of Prisons

· Centtal Office Administrative Remedy Appeal

·-- ...,

Tycpnelsomr uu<sct hhealls-uphomini1ucpdenw. itIhf athttiascahpmpeeanlt.' ar~ needed. submit four copies. One copy each of the completcd BP. '__'Y( IJI .and BP-23()( 131. m· cludm. g any auach-

J 'm: 6c--.Jc...o-\- 'Da>~>' (AST NAME. FIRST. MIDDLElNITIAL

r' C..., ·--..rl
'""" yRE(G.JNOl

-

ry""

vu ·

r~ 1
LUNIT

U$ f

IN'nS-Tc'I-T.U"T'3IOcN:

l fiz:21)

Part A • REASON FOR APPEAL

nec.c\

A s L , r-'\---\- e ' '"?(~C~ I

-\-c::> ~(")') m '-'n ~- c ~-\--c ~---~e c-\-' -r e. \~ v:;l h(.::c..- \-r-h cc~.rc

~'\)~c..\.Q-r~; ?r-~~rc....fY\ ?n::::,...r: c.\_e~

eJ;- \e.r Q._ \ C. 5 S <Z 'S I Q_

,~ c_ ~I -.!- c;,-t- ~

c.Q. '9\(.)v t'

rpvc:::,c-~~(Y\~ ~ ~~V 'I C....J,:'.....:')

('(\ S-t-\ ,__).__c:_~~c.-___:)
-pco·p\c ~6
\1\~~--S.

I-Zr_'-c~1

\__-N~c

-

-

'

'
c I

Part B • RESPONSE

RECEIVED

JAN 2 7 2009

Administrative Remedy Section Federal Bureau of Prisons

DATE

GENERAL COUNSEL

ORIGI_NA_L: R_ ET_UR_N T_O _INM_ AT_ E _ _ _

CASE NUMBER· - - - - - - - - -

rt C ·RECEIPT

-- -- - - - - --- ·- ·- --

.

CASENUMBER: -----------------
Return to: ------;-::-;::::-;-:-:-:-:::--:==----------
u:_N:_IT~----~I~NS~T~IT~U~T:It:>N~- LAST NAME. FIRST. MIDDLE INITIAL
SUBJECT: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - R - E _ G _ .N_o_._ _ _ _ _ _ _

DATE

SIGNATURE OF RECIPIENT OF CENTRAL OFFICE APPEAL
EXHIBIT 19 92

BP-231(13)

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 94 of 372 Page ID #:97
EXHIBIT 20

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 95 of 372 Page ID #:98

C~ I{

\/?0//"-~

U.S. Department of Justke

Federal Bureau of Prisons

· Centtal Office Administrative Remedy Appeal

·-- ..-,

Tyepmesomr uuss1c hhealsl-uphominituepdenw. itIhf a!hlliaseahpmpeenalt.s are needed. submit four copies· One copy each ofthe completed BP- •"•9<1JJ and BP-23()( 13). including any auach-

'"" 6c,Jc...ert 'Dc>,b'J C>\ST NAME. FIRST. MIDDLElNITIAL

c....., . (......
"""'

'I
:rR<EG.")N-O,

-

r"-.. v·
'-...) '->

(~ I
UNIT

US\? He... ¥ hrll)
INSTITUTION

Part A - REASON FOR APPEAL

necc\

A SL 't""'\-t-er ''?f~C~I

~ L.o~ m'--'n ~- C<::>--t-c e>~e c-\-' -.r e \'-t v:/ h(~.. \i-h cede:.-

~"~ c....\Qr"'J y\~~("c..fY\ ?n:.:::,..t: c..\_e ~ r<\S-t-\ 0-..c:.._:.~<.'._:)

& 7 1
Q_. \ c. s s e -s c..\e.r ,, c._ & , -..~- c;,-t- ~r

~o·-p\c ~o

v r- ov r C.<.!.
1- l 2c·-c~ 7

1
rpv oc:~-\C... (Y\~

~

~rv- 'I cc~ -~ \11~~..s.

\
.,-,V~c-

-

. '
f
C

.

t-:>

~

~ . ' . ' C-"1./ .•

DATE

J

Part 8 · RESPONSE

RECEIVED

JAN 2 7 2009

Administrative Remedy Section
Federal Bureau of Prisons

DATE

GENERAL COUNSEL

O_R_ IG_ INA_L:_RE_TU_RN_T_ O I_ NM_AT_E _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _CAS~~~R: - - - - - - - - -

rt C- RECEIPT

---------

CASENUMBER: ----------------

Return to: -----;-::-;::;:;-:-:-::::--::::~--------­

u~N~I~------~~~S~~T~:=-- c

LAST NAME. FIRST. MIDDLE INITIAL

S'IBJECT·. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - R - E _ G _ .N_o_._ _ _ _ _ _

I I TION

DATE

SIGNATURE OF RECIPIENT OF CENTRAL OFFICE APPEAL
EXHIBIT 20 94

BP·231(13)

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed .01/07/11 Page 96 of 372 Page ID #:99

REJECTION NOTICE - ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY DATE: FEBRUARY 5, 2009

FROM: ADMINISTRATIVE CENTRAL OFFICE

TO

DAVID BRYANT, 06704-016

HAZELTON USP

UNT: C

P.O. BOX 450

BRUCETON MILLS, wv 26525

FOR THE REASONS LISTED BELOW, THIS CENTRAL OFFICE APPEAL IS BEING REJECTED AND RETURNED TO YOU. YOU SHOULD INCLUDE A COPY OF THIS NOTICE WITH ANY FUTURE CORRESPONDENCE REGARDING THE REJECTION.

REMEDY ID DATE RECEIVED
+SUBJECT 1 SUB,JSCT 2 INCIDENT RPT NO:

525209-A1

CENTRAL OFFICE

JANUARY 27, 2009

OTHER INSTITUTION PROGRAMS

APPEAL

REJECT REASON 1: YOU SUBMITTED YOUR REQUEST OR APPEAL TO THE WRONG LEVEL. YOU SHOULD HAVE FILED AT THE
...J-c INSTITUTION,':_ REGIONAL OFFICE, OR CENTRAL I - OFFICE LEVEL.

REJECT REASON 2: YOU MUST FIRST FILE A BP-9 REQUEST THROUGH THE INSTITUTION FOR THE WARDEN'S REVIEW AND RESPONSE BEFORE FILING AN APPEAL AT THIS LEVEL.

EXHIBIT 20 95

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 97 of 372 Page ID #:100
EXHIBIT 21

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 98 of 372 Page ID #:101
125 BROAD STREET NEW YORK, N.Y. 10004
July 24, 2009
Via E-mail and U.S. Mail Warden James Cross USP Hazelton P.O. Box450 Bruceton Mills, WV 26525 haz/execassistant@bop.gov
Re: Request for Accommodation to Administrative Remedy Process for Inmate Dayid Brvanl 06704-016
Dear Warden Cross: As I am sure you are aware, inmate David Bryant, Register Number 06704-016, is
deaf. He communicates in American Sign Language ("ASL") and, therefore, does not communicate well in written English. To our knowledge, USP Hazelton does not have any qualified ASL interpreter on staff or under contract with the facility. Please do correct me if my infonnation is incorrect.
I, in conjunction with two ofmy associates and the Washington Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs, have been retained by Mr. Bryant to enforce his rights under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, including, but not limited to, the rights ofreasonable accommodation for his disability and effective communication. Per Program Statement ("PS") 1330.16 and the Prison Litigation Reform Act, Mr. Bryant will be going through the administrative remedy process. He will be filing his BP-8s on July 30, after our legal visit.
I request that under your obligations under PS 1330.16, § 1Ob and the Rehabilitation Act, Mr. Bryant be given the reasonable accommodation of having a copy of any response to any level ofhis administrative remedies be sent to me, his counsel, via email or facsimile. If that is done, we then will be able to effectively communicate the content of any such response to Mr. Bryant and explain his further obligations under the Administrative Remedy Process in a timely manner.
EXHIBIT 21 97

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 99 of 372 Page ID #:102

Warden James Cross

-2-

Alternatively, USP Hazelton could hire a qualified ASL interpreter to assist Bryant in reviewing any responses to his administrative remedies, understanding the relevant portion of PS 1330.16, and completing any subsequent fonns he must submit.
Please respond to this request by July 28, so that I will be able to effectively advise Mr. Bryant of the procedures we adopt during our visit with him on July 30. I am available by telephone, (212) 558-1632, email, fitzwaterm@sullcrom.com, or facsimile, (212) 291-9282.
Further, I am available at any time to discuss the underlying issue of Mr. Bryant's need for effective communication and accommodations so that we may resolve these issues.
Respectfully yours,
M~~
cc: BOP Associate Gen. Counsel Paul W. Layer Office of General Counsel 320 1st Street, NW 7th Floor Washington, DC 20534
Bill Burlington, Regional Com1sel Mid Atlantic Regional Office Federal Bureau of Prisons 302 Sentinel Drive Suite 200 Annapolis Junction, MD 20701

EXHIBIT 21 98

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 100 of 372 Page ID #:103
EXHIBIT 22

: t t l Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 101 of 372 Page ID #:104

INMATE I s NAME: David Bryant

REG. No.o6704-016 UNIT: c - 1

1. Specific Complaint:

- I am a deaf inmate. Since I am deaf, I am unable to hear even loud noises. I am unable to hear the prison's ...

alarms. I miss important warnings and announcements.

...,

2. Relief Requested:
Strobe or vibrating alarms or a vibrating pager. As an alternative, a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and with programs for the deaf.

Part 8: Referred To:

l"'ood Svc

onit Manaqer ,L.

Unicor

B•~lii inliiSS Office

Psyc.hology

Bducat:ion

Trust !'und/wundry · - Reliqiou. servi~es

Rae.eeatioo

Health Service•

correct:ional Svcs

Facilities

safety

ISM/Mailroom/Qecorda

Admillietrat:l..on

Part C: Informal Resolution Attempt

Issue Resolved/ Rali•d Grantee:\

COIIllllenU;~ ¢.~4l.

I~~ue Onr~solved/
- No Relief Grant:ad

Coanents:

r}net.ble 1·o Address

Comnlent:s:

1ssue/Referred To:~
.- ItUllaU! SiQ!UltUre: ~ ~v ~

Jl
.if/

Oo.t"1 7 - ·7o-q

Sta!r Siqnotu&e~

~

unit l'fanaq~tr' • ~:wtu.r11: ~ "\

Oete:

~
Date: t14~/r

~ _..V

~nseLor·~ T~ackinq

·rn~;lcinq t

~
~ent DAte

·~ 20 Days

Fotlll Issued

SP•9 I .asued

ap.:.g Retu:rned

EXHIBIT 22 100

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 102 of 372 Page ID #:105

UNITED S~S PENJ:'R.N'r~'! HAZELTON

- UQQ"&S 1' i'O'R A
I~~ ~SOLUTJ:ON

OM:IlttS'l't FOBM

tAQTe'nIVQZr&'IlU!:PICoEprl'u! lat~on~

"f.)

INMATE'S NAME: David Bryant

REG. No.06704 -016 UNIT: c - 1

1. Specific Complaint:

1ecfoafmmecmtaiuvdneeilcyaafwtienitmehfafttehecetaipnvrdeilsyIocnwo'simtghmupauerndoispc.laeAtewmihnoonAgdmooetnhroiectrakpnnroSowbiglneAmLSsaL,n.tghIuiasamgmeeu(an"naAsbSltehLat"ot).IucInacdnaennrsonttoahtneudanordrceacrsloltmsanfmodruonlriincea-tuep.

1-
-

2. Relief Requested:

ASL interpreter for communications with the prison's other routine announcements. That the prison's guard possible. As an alternative, a transfer to a prison with

guards and a vibrating pager for calls to who knows ASL be assigned to my unit other deaf inmates and programs for the

line-up and as much as deaf.

Part B: Referred To:

~;ood Svc

. £ onit ManaqQr

S•.u.in"s:t Office

Psychology

Tru~t Fund/Laundry ·---- Re11qious Services

H12alth Servfce:s

CorrQCt:ional Svcs

safety

ISM/Mailroom/~ecords

Part C: Informal Resolution Attempt

Unicor 'tducat:ion Rae.raatio.n Facilities Admilli:st:raticn

Issue Resolv•dl Rlilli<Jf Gr!Ultet<i

-Iii - k CClJIIIDiimta; ~ fl.<- M4a-L4t ~~t-C..

!~sua unresolved/
- No Reli•f G~ant:ad

C011menta~

fJnlll.ble l'o Addreas

Co11111ent:~:

rssue/Reterr•d To:

Ir:t~liit:~ Siqnature:W,~\") U _., .-J--

Olll!fll

/ ' ---- St~ft Siqnd~

~

unit Man4g"r'll slq:Ultu.z:~/

L'_f

Date: Coun~"lor·~ Tr.ackinq

/ - ~o- 9 \ J Dato,: e/;z_ /"i

Tra<::l<ing J

a:v"nt oa.t<i

·~ 20 Days

Form I3SUed

8£'-!J h.sued

ap.:.g Retu:rn&d

EXHIBIT 22 101

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 103 of 372 Page ID #:106

ONITED SDD:S li'BHJ:TDTI.A:a'! HAZELTON
UQOKS'r FOR. AillCJ:llnS~:tVZ lU!'JICII:DY
INI'OIUAL QSOLU'.rXON l!"'.RH - Qene:&l Population

INMATE'S NAME: David Bryant

REG. No.o6704 -016 UNIT: c - 1

1. Specific Complaint:

-.I am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I cannot understand or

1-

·communicate effectively with people who do not know ASL. I am unable to participate effectively in the

·prison's work programs because I am unable to understand or communicate with work managers and

f.-coordinators.
2. Relief Requested:

ASL interpreter for work programs in order to understand and communicate with work managers and

-

coordinators. As an alternative, a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and programs for the deaf.

-

Part a: Referred To:

P'ood. svc

On1t Mo&naqer _

- Unicor

S~.U~intass O!!ica

Psyclloloqy _

Zduc:4tion

'

Tru:st !'U.OI1/wundry · - a.liqiaua Services

Rlilc.z:aat104

- - Health Service•

- eorraatlonal svc:s

sa!ety

- ISMJM&ilroom/~ec:orde

Part C: Informal Resolution Attempt

Facilities
- h:t:UI\btratian

Issue Rel!lolvecl/ Ral1~f Grantee

cCllllllllnta ;

I»$u& Onre:solved/
- No ~eli•£ crantad

Calaenta:

Om~bla To l\ddress

COIIIDtlt.s:

Issue/Referrad To:~

t::::J If:NaU Siqnature:

~\) Y""')

.....

Sta!t SiCJDoat.u.ca;

-.\T

D4t•u { - ~c)- q

Date:

I

urut !'tan•q11r' • SJ.q:uti:.W:tl!

Date:

Coun~~lor•s T~•ckin;

Traclrinq f

t'ieDt Date

·~ 20 Daya

Fona I~aued

SP•' Issued

ap..:.g Retu.xned

EXHIBIT 22 102

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 104 of 372 Page ID #:107

UNITED STA'BS l?lDUTEN'l'I.U.'! HAZELTON
UQOBS~ I'OR. ADMnaS~ Rl!:MECY
INI"O!UGL ltZSOLU'.riON B'OlOI - General Populat~o'l,

a#

INMATE'S NAME: David Bryant

REG. No.06704-016 UNIT: c - 1

1. Specific Complaint:

· ·:I am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I cannot understand or ·communicate effectively with people who do not know ASL. I am unable to participate in the prison's

·-

·education programs and vocational programs because I cannot understand or communicate effectively with

~the instructors or other students.
2 . Relief Requested:

ASL interpreter for the education programs and vocational programs in order to understand and

-

communicate effectively with the instructors and other students. As an alternative, a transfer to a prison with -

other deaf inmates and programs for the deaf.

-

Part B: Referred To:

rood Svc

on1e Manaqar .;1:._

Unicor

aujjin411SS O!!ice

Psycholoqy

Bduca~ion

Tnat FUnd/l..a.undry · - Raliqioua Services ____

Rlle~:ea~ion

Health Services

COrrec~ional Svcs

hcilitiaa

satety

ISM/Hailroom/~ecorda

Adm!ni•trati.on

Part C: Informal Resolution Attempt

I.ssue Resolved/ Rali.a! Granter:l

COJIIIIIQnta; ~<- t::4-~l..e.. c!.

I~$ua Onra~olved/
No Reli•f Granc&d _____

Coftnenta~

t1n~bla l'o Address

Co!lllllents:

rs~ue/Reterred To: I
It!lll.lt.~ Signature: ~'~ ~~

Datw1

Staff Sign4tU&a:~

~

Date:

unit Manag111r' ~t Slq:- ..~·· .....,;~"' "/'

l

~

~ CounsftLor's Tr.ackinq

{ - ~<) -

M,

z

/
•

1 •

(

.I

.I

- Date: (,</J~/s._

·rrar.:ltin9' t

G:'118nt. CAtli

·~ ZO DaylJ

Fot111 Iuued

SP•9 Iuued

ap.:.g Return~d

EXHIBIT22 103

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 105 of 372 Page ID #:108

UNITED S~S J?ENI'l'D'l'IARY BAZBL'l'ON UQO"&S'r I'OR. ADKOl'IS~ REMZD~
INI'ONGL :U::SOLU':rl:ON Ji"'ml - Gena~&! Populatioy.

~,J

INMATE'S NAME: David Bryant

T
REG. No.06704- 016 UNIT:

c -1

or---· 1. Specific Complaint:

..

· -1 am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I cannot understand

•I-

.communicate effectively with people who do not know ASL. I am unable to participate in religious

·programs and services. I cannot understand or communicate with the prison's spiritual and religious

_personnel, who do not know ASL.

2. Relief Requested:

ASL interpreter for religious services in order to understand and communicate effectively with spiritual and

religious personnel. As an alternative, a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and with programs for

the deaf.

'

Part 8: Referred To:

rood Svc:

onit M..naqar ':b._

Onic:or

- - aulilinass O!!ice
Tru3t Fund/Laundry ·----
- - Health Service•
sa!ety

Psychology Reliqious Service~
- cor~:act.1onal Svcs
I3M/Mailroom/Qecorda

lduca~ion
Reereatiotl Facilities Adminiatr11tion

Part C: Informal Resolution Attempt

ll!l:sue Resolved/ Roalicat Granted

~ CQ1111!1QnU ; 4-J~~l

I»~ue onr~olved/
- No Reli•f crant.ad

Coaaenta:

On01.ble l'o Address

Co11111ent:~~:

rssue/Referr•d To:

In!llaU Signature: ?f"___.{ ) ~ -~

Sta!r Si9n4tu~a; "·~

~

Oat111
Date:

Unit Manaq11r'• Sl~~UJ:It:

~ )

A / C~~Lor'~ ~r.aekinq

7-~c)-- CJ

f

/

/

. Oate~z./(

·rraclcinCJ I

C'llitnt. 0~

T '0 Oaya

Fot'lll !uued

SP•' Issued

ap.:.g Retu:rndld

EXHIBIT22 104

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 106 of 372 Page ID #:109

-~~ 0#'Dn I'Oil ADICDlXS'r!IMJ:VB RBHBD:r
INJ'ONGL N!:SOLU'l!'ION JFOlUI - General Popul•tion

INMATE'S NAME: David Bryant

- REG. No.o6704-016 UNIT: c 1

1. Specific Complaint:

1 am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). l have difficulty understanding .. ......

spoken English. I am unable to understand and enjoy television because the closed-captioning is not turned -

on.

-

2. Relief Requested:

- That closed-captioning be enabled on a prison television available to me. As an alternative, a transfer to a

prison with other deaf inmates and with programs for the deaf.

-

Part a: Referred To:

- E"OOd Svc

Onit Manaqax ...£.

au~inass Office

PsycholOCJy

Tru~t !'urui/La.undry · -
Health Servtc:es safoty

Reliqioua Service~
- Correctional Svcs
lSM/Mailroom/Recorda

Unicor
- ll<luc:at:1on - Rae.teatiOA
Facilities Aclftlinbtration

Part C: Informal Resolution Attempt

Issue Resolved/ Ral1.af Granted

# - - L l ~ CQ'111118l\U I

I~$ue Onrasolved/ No ~eli•£ c~antad _____

Coaa.enta1

OnM.ble 1'0 Address

ColiiUnt:~:

- rssue/Refarred To:

,/"\ ....

I

Ir!Airil.t\1 Siqnature: .J'-J";:~)r~

~ Sta!t' Sig11catu.ce:

~

unit ffan19er' ~ {fq:u&tw:t~~: ~ ~

DlltUI
Date:

7- ~C)- 9

~·

I

Date: ~/n.-/J

/ ( / ~nselor's T~•ckinq

·rrttcJrinq t

h&~

·~ ZO Days

Fom I.ssued

a~-9 Iuue~

.ap.:.g P.etu:med

EXHIBIT 22 105

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 107 of 372 Page ID #:110

INMATE'S NAME: David Bryant

REG. NO .06704-016 UNIT: c - 1

1. Specific Complaint:

·.J am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language (..ASL"). I cannot understand or

•I-

-communicate effectively with people who do not know ASL. I am unable to understand or communicate

·effectively with medical staff and healthcare providers, including mental healthcare professionals and

-pharmacists.
2. Relief Requested:

ASL interpreter for communicating with medical staff and healthcare providers, including mental healthcare
- professionals and pharmacists. As an alternative, a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and programs -
for the deaf.

Part B: Referred To:

P'ood Svc

On1t Manaqer ~

Unicor

BUMinass O!!ice
Tru:st Fllt'lli/Laundry · -
- Health Service•
!la!ety

Psycholoqy
Reliqioua Servicea ____
- - corract1onal Svc:s
lSM/Hailroom/aec:orda

- Educa~:1on - Reez:oation
Facilities Adiii:I.Rbtration

Part C: Informal Resolution Attempt

!s.sue Resolved/ Roali~! Granted

~ill COliiDQI\ta; ~ 1

l»$ue Unreaolved/
- No Rali•f Grantad

Coaaenta:

Unable 'l'o Address

Conaenta:

rs~ue/Referred To~

.

Inn.JAta Siqnature:~ ~ ·~ 1b, ----\Sf--. Omtill 7- --; U - 9

Sta!f Signa~

~

Date:

Unit r.1ant~r' » Slq:w.tw:v~

J

·rraell'inq J

-/ ~
e:vant D.lltQ

~ Couns~Lor'" Tl:aelcinq

·• 20 Day~

Fot111 I:s:sued

Date: ty;i!..-/1,

3P•9 r.,~ued

ap.:.g Retumed

EXHIBIT 22 106

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 108 of 372 Page ID #:111
EXHIBIT 23

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 109 of 372 Page ID #:112

INMATE'S NAME: David Bryant

REG. No.o6704-0l6 UNIT: c - 1

l. Specific Complaint:
-.ram a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I cannot understand or

.

-communicate effectively with people who do not know ASL. I am unable to understand or communicate

·effectively with medical staff and healthcare providers, including mental healthcare professionals and

t-pharmacists.
2. Relief Requested:

ASL interpreter for communicating with medical staff and healthcare providers, including mental healthcare -
- professionals and pharmacists. As an alternative, a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and programs -
for the deaf.

Part 8: Referred To:

- - - Food Svc

Onit ManaqQr ..1{__

- - at~liiinQSS Office

Psyc.hology

Trust F~/Laundry ·~ R•l1qious Service~ ____

Unicor Education Rac:reatioo

HG!alth Services

COrrQCLional Svcs

Facilities

safety

ISH/Mail room/Recorda

P.clminJ.strMtion

Part: C: Informal Resolution Attempt

Issue Resolv•dl Reli<~t Granted.

CommQnU: ~ ~h. ./._

!$~ue onr~solved/
No Reli•f GranLgd ~

Coaaents:

[)nablQ 1'0 Address

Cotmtent.s:

rssue/Referred Toz I
Ir:mat~ Signature:J....~ .. ' ~ 1L ---'Sf--.

7- -cr Dllll!tll

~u

Staff Signa~

~

:Jnit Man,~·,. slq:101.1:.w:w~

)

Date:

I
Date: 80z../1

'l'rar.:ldng J

-/ \7
l!:vQnt oat<il

~ Coun..,,Lor' ., 'l':r:aelcinq

+ ZO Day~

Fo:rlll r-'S:5Uad

SP•9 !!J-'U"d

ap.:.g Retu:rned

EXHIBIT 23 108

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 110 of 372 Page ID #:113
INFORMAL RESOLUTION This is in response to your Request for Informal Resolution dated 07-30-09. You recently indicated because you are deaf you are having a difficult time communicating with Health Services staff. You stated you cannot understand or communicate effectively with people who do not understand American Sign Language (ASL) . Contact has been made with Health Services staff who have been unaware of your recent problems communicating. Since your arrival on 10-11-2007, they have attempted to work with you to overcome your disability by exchanging and sharing written messages. It appeared this procedure was mutually successful and there was an understanding obtained between you an Health Services staff. It is unfortunate, you are beginning to experience problems communicating. Currently, however, we do not have staff who are skilled in ASL. Nevertheless, this maybe a skill that we could explore in more detail when new staff or new hires are being considered for employment at USP Hazelton.
R.
EXHIBIT 23 109

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 111 of 372 Page ID #:114

UNITED S'r.ARS PBN:I'l'D'r!AitY HAZELTON UQOKS'r FOlt ADMINJ:STIU.T::rvE REMEDY
- INFORMAL RESOLU!t'J:ON B'O:RM Gener~ Populatio~

aP

INMATE'S NAME:: David Bryant

REG. No.o6704- 016 UNIT: c - 1

1. Specific Complaint:
·.1 am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I cannot understand or -communicate effectively with people who do not know ASL. I am unable to participate in the prison's ·education programs and vocational programs because I cannot understand or communicate effectively with
r-the instructors or other students.
2. Relief Requested:
ASL interpreter for the education programs and vocational programs in order to understand and communicate effectively with the instructors and other students. As an alternative, a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and programs for the deaf.

Part 8: Referred To:

<ood .9vc

unit ManaqQ'r ,'j__

Onicor

E!t~.vint;~ss Office

PsycholoC]y

Education

Tru3t FUnd/L~undry _____ Religious Services

RQe.eeation.

Hli!alth ServicelJ satety

corrQCtional Svcs
ISM/Mailroom/~ecords

- C'acilitin
Admini•tration

Part C: Informal Resolution Attempt

Issue Re50lved/ Rtiili~! Granteli

COI!IIIIQnts; $-L.~ ?<--~~<i

r~~ua Unrasolved/
- No ~eli•£ ~ranted

Coaaenta:

Uu&bla l'o Address

COII'IIIents:

Is!ue/Reierred TO: I
Icunal:~ Signature:~r~ ;.6.} ~~

Oat~>~l

St~ft SignutUCQ;~ ;-:::.::.::

~ ..-

Date~:

~nit Han~g11r's Sl~:w ......... ~/

\

c__x.

. /coun.'S"Lor' s Tr.acldoq

{-70 -(

&, 1277

~

Date: k/;~/\)

7

,

Traclring t

e:v"nt O~.tt~

~ 20 Days

Fo:t'lll r.,-:sued

BP•9 Issued

ap.:.g Return<~:d

EXHIBIT 23 110

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 112 of 372 Page ID #:115
INFORMAL RESOLUTION This is in response to your Request for Informal Resolution dated 07-30-09. You recently indicated because you are deaf you are unable to participate in the prison's education programs and vocational programs. You stated you cannot participate or communicate effectively with instructors or o~her students who do not understand American Sign Language (ASL) . Contact has been made with Educational Services staff who have indicated they have attempted to work with you in the past and provide you with educational programs based on your special needs. However, it appears you have demonstrated very little motivation to engage with the educational staff to assist you in educational and vocational programming. I encourage you to meet with the Educational Supervisor who is aware of your needs and can assist you in your educational programming.
Date
EXHIBIT 23 111

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 113 of 372 Page ID #:116
$1

UNITEn S~rli:S PBNITENTIA:aY HAZELTON
J. ~51' i'Olt ADM'IlnSTRA.TrVB REMBOY
~J.) !Ni'ORMAL RESOLU'.riON FORM - General l>opulation /

INMATE'S NA.M.E: David Bryant

REG. No.o6704-0l6 UNIT: c - 1

1. Specific Complaint:
1 am a deaf inmate. Since I am deaf, I am unable to hear even loud noises. I am unable to hear the prison's ...,_
alarms. I miss important warnings and announcements.

2. Relief Requested:
Strobe or vibrating alarms or a vibrating pager. As an alternative, a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and with programs for the deaf.

Part 8: Referred To:

- - - E"ood :3vc

onit Manaqlir -K..

El•~.o in"s:J Oft' ice

Pllychology

Tru:~t Fund/Laundry .

Religious Service3

- - Health Servica:~
safety

corracc1onal Svcs
ISM/Mailroom/~ecords

Onicor
- ltducacion
Rlitc.re.atioo. Facilities Adltlini.stration

Part C: Informal Resolution Attempt

Issue Re:~ol vtad/ Rr.lll1.af Granteci

k l, ~ ~~ CQJIIIIQnt.s;

I~~Ya Onr~solved/
- No Ralhf G:rancad

Conaent.s:

f)n&blQ l'o Addre11s

Co11111ents:

\?J I~sue/Ref~rred TO:A
Iruuat12 :':ii<Jil.Sture: ~ ~

/1
~ ~

7 - Dattt:

70-q

Sta!t Sign4tU&Q~

~

Date:

unit Man.,gar':t ~!llolt~.~.t:w:~

'\

·rra~;Jcing J

v / '
---- e:-vlitnt o~t<i

~n~~Lor·~ Tr.acking

·~ 20 Day8

Fot'lll Is:sued

Date: tf/i~/r

3P-9 I.,~ued

ap.:.g Retu;m<td

EXHIBIT 23 112

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 114 of 372 Page ID #:117
INFORMAL RESOLuTION success This is in response to your Request for Informal Resolution dated 07-30-09. You indicate because you are deaf you have a difficulty hearing loud noises and alarms. You request strobe or vibrating alarms or a vibrating pager as an alternative or a transfer to another prison with other deaf inmates. As an inmate you are under constant supervision by correctional staff. In case of emergencies and or alarms staff are accountable for your whereabouts and will insure you are notified and your safety maintained. In addition, fire alarms meet visual compliance with strobe and inmates are not allowed to possess any electronic device that is not approved by the Federal Bureau of Prisons.
t Manager
EXHIBIT 23 113

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 115 of 372 Page ID #:118

UNITED S:r.ArES PENJ:T&N'riA:a:t HAZELTON
- INJ'ORMARLEQlOUB!:SSO'rLUl!'OTRJ:.ONADKB'IO:NBM:tST'AGATeYnVeEralUl!'.MPBo'DpYulation~ "Jf.)

INMATE'S NAME: David Bryant

REG. No.06704-016 UN1T: c - 1

1. Specific Complaint:
"I am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I cannot understand or

_...

communicate effectively with people who do not know ASL. I am unable to understand or communicate -

effectively with the prison's guards. Among other problems, this means that I cannot hear calls for line-up.

2. Relief Requested:
ASL interpreter for communications with the prison's guards and a vibrating pager for calls to line-up and other routine announcements. That the prison's guard who knows ASL be assigned to my unit as much as possible. As an alternative, a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and programs for the deaf.

Part B: Referred To:

- l"ocd Svc
St~lilinQ.sa Office

Onit ManaqQr ..:f_.
Psychology

Tru3t Fund/L4undry ·---- Reliqious Sarvices

Unicor
- !ducation
Raereation

Health Servlce:s

eorrQCtional Svcs

Facilities

safety

ISM/Mailroom/~ecords

Actm.inhtration

Part C: Informal Resolution Attempt

Issue Resolv•dl

·:;;; CQDIIIQnt.s: ~ ·fk- a.A4a.G-4i ~~t-C..

RQli<llf Gr1111ted.

-Ill

l~3ue Unresolved/
- No Relief Grantad

C011111enta:

tJn01.bl" To Address

Cc111111ents:

Is~ue/Reierred To:

Ir~lilt.a

Signature:

~

"
_;::::,\)

'{5____

;d-

Oet.t.ttl

St~ft Signa~

~

\ unit Man"ger''~ Slg!U.tUL·~

./ ---- ('7

Dste: Ccun:s~lor'' Tr.acking

/- -c,o·- 9
\
l
Date:e/;z/-,
T

'fracl<ing J

a:v~nt DatQ

·~ 20 Days

Fo:t111 r_,:sued

oP-9 I-'-'UI!d

sp..:.g Return<Sid

EXHIBIT 23 114

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 116 of 372 Page ID #:119

UNITED ST.M:'ES 1?ENJ:'l'ENTIARY HAZELTON
REQOES'l' FOR ADMDUSTRATIVP! Rl!'.MEDY
INFO~ ~SOLUTION FORM - General Population

INMATE'S NAME: David Bryant

REG. No.o67o4-0l6 UNIT: c - 1

1. Specific Complaint:

· ·I am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I cannot understand or

-

·communicate effectively with people who do not know ASL. I am unable to participate effectively in the

·prison's work programs because I am unable to understand or communicate with work managers and

-coordinators. 2 . Relief Requested:

ASL interpreter for work programs in order to understand and communicate with work managers and

-

coordinators. As an alternative, a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and programs for the deaf.

-

Part B: Referred To:

F"ood Svc - - -
- - 9t;.:; iflf:!S~ Office
Trust Fund/Laundry ·----
- - Health Servi.ces
safety

Onit: ManagGtr .
Psychology
Religiou~ Service~
corrgct:ional Svc~ ISM/Mail room/Record~

Part C: Informal Resolution Attempt

Is!!ue Re~olved/ Rlollie:f Granted

COIIUI\Qnt:s;

Unicor Educacion Racraat:ion Facilities
Actrni~istriltion

I~$ua Unresolved/ No Relief Granted
~

Connent~:

Una.blG To Address

Comments:

r~sue/Referred To:~
N I1:.nLat:e Signature:
Sta f:t' Signa tura;

~\) 'fS ...,

......_v--

Di.11!el j - Z., () - 9
r
Date:

:.mit Manag111r' s S.iq:u.~.tu..t:w:

Date:

• Tracking

e.:v"nt. cat<2

Coun~elor·~ T~acking

·~ 20 Days

Fo:nn I.ssued

5E'-9 I.'3sued

BP.:.9 Retu:med

EXHIBIT 23 115

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 117 of 372 Page ID #:120

UNITED S~S PENJ:T.I.NTIAlU HAZELTON
- ~J() UQtl'ES1' FOR. ADNJ:Nl:S'l!llA!rl:VE REMEDY
INJ'ORMAI.. QSOLUT:ION FORM QenQr~ Populatio~

INMATE'S NAME: David Bryant

REG. No.06704-0l6 UNIT: c - 1

or- --· 1. Specific Complaint:
· ·:I am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I cannot understand

.communicate· effectively with people who do not know ASL. I am unable to participate in religious

programs and services. I cannot understand or communicate with the prison's spiritual and religious

f.-personnel, who do not know ASL.

2. Relief Requested:

ASL interpreter for religious services in order to understand and communicate effectively with spiritual and

religious personnel. As an alternative, a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and with programs for

the deaf.

'

Part 8: Raferred To:

- - - Food Svc
- - at;:;;iness Office

onit Manaqcu :i_.
Psychology

Trust Fund/Laundry · - Reliqious Ssrvice~

Unicor Educat:ion R.aereatio.n

Health Serv:i.c•lf

corrQCtional svcs

Facilities

sa!ety

!SM/Mailroom/Recor~s

M!m:i.n.i3tration

Part C: Informal Resolution Attempt

I.ssue Resolv•dl
Rlill ie~~f Granted

CQIIIIIQnts: ~ ~<-l

!~$u8 onrGaolved/
- - No Relimf Grantad

Connents:

!Ju.w.bl.a 1'o Address

Co11111ent~:

rssue/Reterrad To:

Ic!illolte Siqnatun:~~)
Staft' Signc1I:U.CQ; ~
unit Man~gtJr'!l Sl'1~U.Z:II:

~ .. ~
......r )

Oat.~tl
Da.te:

7-~o-q

7

L

L_

oate:c5'Jz../)

A7

c~eLor·~ 't'r.aclcinq

Traclcing f

lt'Y~nt o~

T 20 Day~

Form I-55U&d

aP-9 I-s~ued

ap.:.g Returned

EXHIBIT 23 116

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 118 of 372 Page ID #:121
INFORMAL RESOLUTION This is in response to your Request for Informal Resolution dated 07-30-09. You recently indicated because you are deaf you are having a difficult time communicating with Religious Services staff. You stated you cannot participate in religious programs and services with people who do not understand American Sign Language (ASL) . Contact has been made with Religious Services staff who have been unaware of your recent problems communicating. Since your arrival on 10-11-2007, they have attempted to work with you to overcome your disability by exchanging and sharing written messages. it appeared this procedure was mutually successful and there was an understanding obtained between you and the Religious Services staff. It is unfortunate, you are beginning to experience problems communicating. In addition, numerous religious programs are conducted by inmates under the supervision of the Chaplain and you have been accompanied by a companion who has assisted you in communicating and sharing your religious beliefs. Currently, however, we do not have staff who are skilled in ASL. Nevertheless, this maybe a skill that we could explore in more detail when new staff or new hires are being considered for employment at USP Hazelton.
Date
EXHIBIT 23 117

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 119 of 372 Page ID #:122

0/JlJtl INBO1~UOQ!U<J!:lSlllO1'L1U'0"1!>l:.ONADFKOnRiMXS-!rRQUernYazI!:I ~lltE>PII!o:DpYulation

INMATE'S NAME: David Bryant

REG. No.06704-0l6 UNIT: c - 1

1. Specific Complaint:

1 am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I have difficulty understanding ..

spoken English. I am unable to understand and enjoy television because the closed-captioning is not turned -

on.

-

2. Relief Requested:

That closed-captioning be enabled on a prison television available to me. As an alternative, a transfer to a -

prison with other deaf inmates and with programs for the deaf.

-

Part B: Referred To:

- - - Food Svc
- - Bt.J.>~inGI$S Ot!ice
Tru:st !"u.nd/1.4\lD.dry · -

Onit ManaqQr ..JS__
Psychology Religious Service~

Unicor !!duca'tion RQcraatio.n

H~;~alth Servtce.s

CorrQC'tional Svcs

Facilities

safety

ISM/Hailroom/~ecords

Admir:~J..-traticn

Part C: Informal Resolution Attempt

Issue Re.solv•d.l RQlie!t Granted

CClllllllQl\U ; ~ ~-fk_f~.l

l~$ua Onrasolved/
- No Re.l.i.a£ Gran'tad

Coaaenta:

on...ble 1'0 Address

C011111ent~:

-- Issue/Referred To:
I1~t~ Signature:

,.J-)-,;I_\-<".--JJ'~I

Oat..: 7- S6- 9

~ Staff signatuca:
Unit Managttr' ~ (f~~u.,t.u.rw:

~
~- \

Date:

i

I

Dat~: ~-z.-/J

Trar;Jcing f

/ ( /- li:V~

~un'"Lor' _., 'I'r.ack:inq

-~ 20 Days

Fom h:su&<:t

BJ?•j I.!l.sued

BP-9 Retuzned

i

''

EXHIBIT 23 118

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 120 of 372 Page ID #:123
INFORMAL RESOLUTION success This is in response to your Request for Informal Resolution dated 07-30-09. You indicate because you are deaf you are unable to understand and enjoy television because the closed captioning is not turned on. A television in C-1 has been designated with closed captioning. If there are problems with this television you need to inform the unit officer or unit staff.
Manager
EXHIBIT 23 119

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 121 of 372 Page ID #:124
EXHIBIT 24

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 122 of 372 Page ID #:125
125 BROAD STREET
Ne:w YORK, N.Y. 10004
August 18, 2009
Via U.S. Mail Warden James Cross USP Hazelton P.O. Box 450 Bruceton Mills, WV 26525
Re: Inmate David Bryant, Register Number 06704-016 Dear Warden Cross:
I write on behalf of inmate David Bryant, Register Number 06704-016, who is deaf and communicates in American Sign Language ("ASL"). Enclosed please find seven Requests for an Administrative Remedy (BP-9s) that Mr. Bryant submits in an effort to enable him to become informed of prison warnings and announcements, participate in prison activities, and communicate with inmates and prison staff, including guards, medical personnel, religious and spiritual leaders, educators, and work personnel.
On July 30, 2009, Mr. Bryant filed seven requests for an administrative remedy (BP-8s) related to these same subjects. He received responses to six of those requests on August 12, 2009. Attached to each of the enclosed BP-9s is a copy (without attachments) of the corresponding response that Mr. Bryant received to each ofhis informal requests. For the request to which he received no response, Mr. Bryant has attached to the corresponding BP-9 a copy of the unanswered request.
In addition, I have not received a response to my request of July 24, 2009 for an accommodation so that I (and my colleagues) may help Mr. Bryant with the grievance process. This accommodation is necessary because Mr. Bryant communicates in ASL, which is a language with a complex grammatical structure and without a one-toone correspondence with English. Specifically, I requested that under PS 1330.16, § 1Ob and the Rehabilitation Act, Mr. Bryant be given the reasonable accommodation of having a copy of any response to any level of his administrative remedies be sent to me, his counsel, via email or facsimile. This accommodation is necessary in order for Mr. Bryant to comply with the grievance process as his understanding and ability to communicate in
EXHIBIT 24 121

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 123 of 372 Page ID #:126

Warden James Cross

-2-

English is limited. Additionally, I also request a copy ofUSP Hazelton's Institutional Supplement toPS 1330.16, which is not otherwise publicly available, so that we can ensure that Mr. Bryant complies with USP Hazleton's guidelines.

I am available at any time to discuss these issues. You can reach me by telephone, (212) 558-1632, email, fitzwaterm@sullcrom.com, or facsimile, (212) 2919282.

Respectfully yours,

J1L/t-v ;£l-Ju- /:lEe~

.

'

Matthew Fitzwater

(Enclosures)
cc: BOP Associate General Counsel Paul W. Layer (via email) Bill Burlington, BOP Regional Counsel (via email)

EXHIBIT 24 122

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 124 of 372 Page ID #:127

-J

FF.Dl!RAL NISON INOUSTRIF.S, !Nl'

l.EAVtNW<lRTlt, li.A.l'O~AS

U.S. OEI'.\RTMENT OF JU~II<.:E Fcdcml Bureau of Prl~ms

REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

From: Styant. David, D.
LAST N.utE. t'INST. MIDilUi INITIAL
Part A- INMATE REQUEST

06704-016
Nt;(;. NO.

C-1 uljrr

U.S.P. Hazelton
IN!>TIT\JTION

I am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"}. I cannot understand or communicate effectively with people who do not know ASL. I am
unable to participate in religious programs and services. I cannot understand or communicate with the prison's spiritual and religious personnel, who do not know ASL.

I am requesting an ASL interpreter for religious services in order to understand and communicate effectively with spiritual and religious personnel. As an alternative, I request a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and with programs for the deaf.

DATE
Part B- RESPONSE
•

DATE

WARDEN OR REGIONAL DIRECTOR

If diwiiU/lH rill tJW ,.._.,,""'- tqlfWtll ~ tJu lt•f(l<lul ~. YowrapfiHI "'"" bo rrrriffll U. II,. It~ 0/fol widobt 20 allll4ltr <1411 ~/141 dttU ofW. , . . _

-O-R-IW-N-A-L:-R-ET-U-RN-T-O-IN-M-A-TE--------------------------CA-S-E -N-U --M --B-E-R --:----------------

CASE NUMBER:---------

Part C- RECEIPT

R<tum to: Bryant, David, D.

06704-016

C-1

U.S.P. Hazeltt

LAST NAME. FIRST. MIDDLE INITIAL

REG. NO.

UNIT

INSTITUTION

suruEcT: __________________________________________________________________________

DATE

RECIPIENT'S SIGNATURE <STAFF MEMIIF.RI

BP-229 APAIL ~

•

EXHIBIT 24 123

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 125 of 372 Page ID #:128

UNITED S~S I?ENJ:T.I.N:t'IARY HAZELTON
- ~~ UQCES:t' lfOa ADNINI:S'l'RATI:VP! RENEJ:)Y
INFORMAL RESOLtJ''.ri:ON FO:RK Gener~ Populatio~

INMATE'S NAME: David Bryant

REG.

1
No.06704-016 UNI'I':

c-1

or---· l. Specific Complaint:

· ·Jam a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I cannot understand

~

.communicate· effectively with people who do not know ASL. I am unable to participate in religious programs and services. I cannot understand or communicate with the prison's spiritual and religious

'"personnel, who do not know ASL.

2. Relief Requested:

ASL interpreter for religious services in order to understand and communicate effectively with spiritual and religious personnel. As an alternative, a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and with programs for

the deaf.

'

Part B: Referred TO:

- - - Food Svc:
a<~.ooinQSS Office

Onit ManaqQr ~-
Psychology _

Unicor :&ducation

Tru~t Fund/Laundry ·---- Reliqious Service~

Rac:reatioo

- - H~ialth Serv:l.ce:r
safety

- - corrgce1onal svcs
ISM/Mailroom/Records

Facilities Adm1ni.,trllticn

Part C: Informal Resolution Attempt

Issue Resolved/ Rli!li<!f Granted

COIIIIIQlltS; ~ ~~t

I¥~ua unresolved/
- - No Relief Grantad

Connents:

r;u...bl~;~ l'o Address

Co!1VIIent.3:

r~sue/Reterred To:

Ir~U S1qnature:P";,._~) ~ ~~

Dl!lttu

Staff SignatUCQ: v~

~

Date:

Unit Manag~tr's Slq~W:II!

~ '\

- ; ; r / C~'~Lor'~ Tr.sckinq

7-~o-q

/

/

Date:c!Y/z. / )

Tracldng t

mvo;mt ~

T 20 Days

Fol'lll r'su&d

J.?E'-~ I-9lJUed

ap.:g Returned.

EXHIBIT 24 124

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 126 of 372 Page ID #:129
INFORMAL RESOLUTION This is in response to your Request for Informal Resolution dated 07-30-09. You recently indicated because you are deaf you are having a difficult time communicating with Religious Services staff. You stated you cannot participate in religious programs and services with people who do not understand American Sign Language (ASL) . Contact has been made with Religious Services staff who have been unaware of your recent problems communicating. Since your arrival on 10-11-2007, they have attempted to work with you to overcome your disability by exchanging and sharing written messages. ~t appeared this procedure was mutually successful and there was an understanding obtained between you and the Religious Services staff. It is unfortunate, you are beginning to experience problems communicating. In addition, numerous religious programs are conducted by inmates under the supervision of the Chaplain and you have been accompanied by a companion who has assisted you in communicating and sharing your religious beliefs. Currently, however, we do not have staff who are skilled in ASL. Nevertheless, this maybe a skill that we could explore in more detail when new staff or new hires are being considered for employment at USP Hazelton.
Date
EXHIBIT 24 125

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Ff.DEitAL I'RI.'WN I~OUSTRIF.S I~ Filed 01/07/11 Page 127 of 372 Page ID #:130
U:AVf.NWOIITH, kAN~AS

U.S. OF.PARTMENT Of JU1iTICE
Fetlcral Bureau ,,f Prlsmts

REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

'l)pt' or u:te' hall-point pe11. If <•lf«t lrmt'nb ar~ m•t>clt•tl, .whmit four t opit'.\'. Addwouul iii.HntUimu on rt'\'t'r.it'.

FMHD:--~B~r~y~a~n~t~,~D~a~v~i~d~·-HDL•--------------­
L\1>1 NAMF.••llt!>T. MII>OI.F. INITIAL
Part A- INMATE REQUE3'T

06704-016
KEG. NO.

C-1
U~IT

U.S.P. Hazelton
INSTITUTION

I am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I cannot understand or communicate effectively with people who do not know ASL. I am unable to participate in the prison's education programs and vocational programs because I cannot understand or communicate effectively with the instructors or
other students.

For these reasons, I am requesting an ASL interpreter for the education programs and vocational programs in order to understand and communicate effectively with the instructors and other students. As an alternative, I request a transfer to a prison with
other deaf inmates and programs for the deaf.

DATE
Part B- RESPONSE

DATE

WARDEN OR REGIONAL DIRECTOR

in'"" If dh.-i•/i<d wil~ tlW " - · 1"*' _, apfHal to t/u lhP,wd Dl-.r. y..,, ttppHI ..,.,. 1M -...;..tl

R•,w..ol Offln ,.;,laiJo 10 <Ill•,.,""''of'"" dtlu oftllu rttpMt:

-O-R-IG-IN-A-L:-IU-:T-U-RN-T-O-IN-M-A-TE--------------------------CA-S-E -NU-M-B-ER-:-----------------------

Part C- RECEIPT
Return ro: Bryant, David, D.
LAST NAME, FIRST. MIDDLE INITIAL

06704-016
REG. NO.

CASE NUMBER: - - - - - - - - - - -

C-1
UNIT

U.S. P. Hazelt•
INSTITUTION

SUWECT:---------------------------------------------------------------------------

DATE

RECIPIENT'S SIGNATURE ISTAFF MEMBER!

BP-2a APRIL 1

EXHIBIT 24 126

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 128 of 372 Page ID #:131

UNITED ST.A1'KS PBNJ:'l'J:ll'riARY RAZB:t.TON
- UQCKS'l' FOR. AOMJ:N:tS~ ::REMII:DY
INJ'OE'<MAL ZU:SOLtl'.ri:ON l!'ORM GenerAl Population~

aP

INMATE'S NAME: David Bryant

REG. No.o6704- o16 UNIT: c - 1

l. Specific Complaint: ·-1 am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I cannot understand or

-communicate effectively with people who do not know ASL. I am unable to participate in the prison's

·education programs and vocational programs because I cannot understand or communicate effectively with

Hhe instructors or other students.
2. Relief Requested:

ASL interpreter for the education programs and vocational programs in order to understand and

-

communicate effectively with the instructors and other students. As an alternative, a transfer to a prison with -

other deaf inmates and programs for the deaf.

Part 8: Referred To:

- - - rood .9vc

unit Manaqar .:i_

8tl»in.-ss Office

l':!yc:hology

Onicor Sduca1:1on

Tru3t FUnd/Laundry ·----
- - Health Services
Safety

Religious Services Corract.ional Svcs
ISM/Ma11room/~ecords

:!hl(:l:Qia t.iOtl.
- Facilities
Admini•tration

Part C: Informal Resolution Attempt

Issue Resolv•dl Rtili<llf Gr!lnteti

COIIIIIIQnta; .;Y.e. C"--'-{4~/ J'-d.

I~~Yil Onr~solved/
- No Ralie£ ~rant.ad

Coaments:

Uuablti l'o Address

C01m1ents:

!!l~ue/Referr•d To:

. .r-- -- ' IrUt'Liilt~ Signature: ~t:. ~ ~~

Staft Siqnutu~e;

~

..,.,--., :Jnit Han~g.,r's S~ l~:w~~-·

\

Oii'to.tl
Date:

cY-

_./ coun.,.,Lor' s Tr.ar.:Jdnq

r-7o -
&, 1/z/9

r

J

Date: Y:/J~I~

1

,

Trar.l<ing f

/l:VQJlt: Clt.tQ

• 20 Days

Fo011 I_,sued

BP-9 I.s.sued

Bp.:.g Return<td

EXHIBIT 24 127

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 129 of 372 Page ID #:132
INFORMAL RESOLUTION This is in response to your Request for Informal Resolution dated 07-30-09. You recently indicated because you are deaf you are unable to participate in the prison's education programs and vocational programs. You stated you cannot participate or communicate effectively with instructors or other students who do not understand American Sign Language (ASL) . Contact has been made with Educational Services staff who have indicated they have attempted to work with you in the past and provide you with educational programs based on your special needs. However, it appears you have demonstrated very little motivation to engage with the educational staff to assist you in educational and vocational programming. I encourage you to meet with the Educational Supervisor who is aware of your needs and can assist you in your educational programming.
Date
EXHIBIT24 128

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 f."F.D£RAL j}ti;I'\ON 11'40\!HRitS. INC Filed 01/07/11 Page 130 of 372 Page ID #:133 U:AVf.P-IWORrH, KANSAS

U.S. OF.PAilTMENT OF JU~'TICE FederJJ Bureau of Prisnns

REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

Typ~ or Wit' lxdl-pm'm pt~n. If anadmumiS urt~ nt•t•dt!d..whmit four cop;t'!i. Atl<litimral imuru('fions on rt·~·ers~.

From: Brvant. David. D.
I.AST NAME, I'IR~"T, MIOI>U: INITIAL
Part A- INMATE REQUEST

06704-016
ltE(;. NO.

C-1
UNIT

U.S.P. Hazelton
INSTITUTION

I am a deaf inmate and I col!DDunicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I have difficulty understanding spoken English. I am unable to understand and enjoy television because the closed-captioning is not turned on.

For these reasons, I am requesting closed-captioning be enabled on a prison television available to me. As an alternative, I request a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and with programs for the deaf.

Part 8- RESPONSE

DATE

WARDEN OR REGIONAL DIRECTOR

ORIGINAL: RETlJilN TO INMATE

CASE NUMBER:---------

CASE NUMBER:---------

Part C- RECEIPT
RelUm to: Bryant, David, D.

~6704-016

C-1

U.S.P. Razelt•

LAST NAME. FIRST. MIDDLE INITIAL

REG. NO.

UNIT

INSTITUTION

SUWECT: ____________________________________________________

DATE

RECIPIENT'S SIGNATURE tSTAFF MEMBER I

BP-229 APAtll

EXHIBIT 24 129

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 131 of 372 Page ID #:134

INMATE'S NAME: David Bryant

REG. No.o6704-0l6 UNIT: c - 1

1. Specific Complaint:

1 am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I have difficulty understanding ...1-

spoken English. I am unable to understand and enjoy television because the closed-captioning is not turned

on.

-

2. Relief Requested:

That dosed-captioning be enabled on a prison television available to me. As an alternative, a transfer to a -

prison with other deaf inmates and with programs for the deaf.

-

Part B: Referred To:

- - - l"ooct Svc

Onit Ma.naqQr ...£....

- - B•~»inass O!!ice

Psychology

Tru:st Fund/L.a.\llldry · - Religious Services

Unicor S:ducat:ion Recreation

Health Serv:l.ces

Corract:ional Svcs

Facilities

safety

ISM/Mailroom/aecords

Adm;!.nilttratio.n

Part C: Informal Resolution Attempt

Is:sue Resolved/
RQli<!f Gr!lllted

~ COIIII!IQl\ts ;

~ Ll

I~sua onraaolved/
- No Relief Grant:ad

Coamenta:

Uu...ble 1'o Address

C011111ent:~:

-- 17 Issue/Referred To'

,!'\ ....

I

InA\AU Sign<Ltun: ..._J-)-;.L--?l) ~~

7 - Olit111

'S 6- 9

~ Staft. Signutura;

:>=::

Date:

i

I

unit Managllr'"' ~:u.tl:u.t:w: ~

/ 7 /- "' Trar.:Jcing t

li:VQ~

_.>/unsP.tlor' .!J 't'l:'acking

-~ zo Days

Fom I~:su&d

Dah: Y,-z.-/5

BP•9 I.,~ued

BP-9 Retu:med

i

J I

EXHIBIT24 130

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 132 of 372 Page ID #:135
INFORMAL RESOLUTION success This is in response to your Request for Informal Resolution dated 07-30-09. You indicate because you are deaf you are unable to understand and enjoy television because the closed captioning is not turned on. A television in C-1 has been designated with closed captioning. If there are problems with this television you need to inform the unit officer or unit staff.
Manager
EXHIBIT 24 131

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 133 of 372 Page ID #:136

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JU5nCE Federal Bureau of Prisons

REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

Type or use ball-point pen. If atuu:hmnru are nuded. submit jour mpies. Addili<mal irutn.ctiuns on rever<e.

FI'OID: Bryant, David. D,
LAST NAME, FIRST, MIDDLE INJTIAL
Part A-INMATE REQUEST

06704...016 REG. NO.

C-1
UN1T

U.S.P, Hazelton
INS1TnJTION

I aa a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I cannot understand or communicate effectively with people who do not know ASL. I am unable to understand or communicate effectively with medical staff and healthcare providers, including mental healthcare professionals and pharmacists.

I am requesting an ASL interpreter for communicating with medical staff and healthcare providers, including mental healthcare professionale and pharmacists. Aa an alternative, I request a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and programs for the deaf.

DATB
Part B- RESPONSE

SIGNATtlltB OF REQUESTER

,_,.._._,_.,_,.IM..,_Oflb DATB
lf*-'4JW_'*U_.1"" _,_.,.. ... ..,_/Jirtetwo.

WARDEN OR REGIONAL DIRBCTOII
-D-.,II/IIN'**II/IIo6r-

ORIGINAL: RETURN TO INMATE

CASE NUMBER:::::_::::_::::-=====

Part C- REC'EJPT

CASE NUMBER:---------

Return 10: Bryant. Dayid. D.

06704..016

c-1

U.S.P. Hazalt

SUIDECT:

_

_

_

LAST ____

NAME, ____

FIRST, MIDDLE _________

INmAL _______

_

_

_

_

_

_

REG. NO. ______

_

_

_

_

____

UNIT ____

_

_

___

_

INS1TTUTION _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _

DATE

RECIP1ENT'S SIGNATIJRE !STAFF MEMBER)

BP-:!2111 APRil. I

EXHIBIT 24 132

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 134 of 372 Page ID #:137

INMATE'S NAME: David Bryant

REG. No.o6704-0l6 UNIT: c - 1

1. Specific Complaint:

· ~I am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I cannot understand or

.

communicate effectively with people who do not know ASL. I am unable to understand or communicate

·effectively with medical staff and healthcare providers, including mental healthcare professionals and

r-pharmacists.

2. Relief Requested:

ASL interpreter for communicating with medical staff and healthcare providers, including mental healthcare professionals and pharmacists. As an alternative, a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and programs for the deaf.

Part B: Referred To:

- l'"ood 3vc

L . onit: ManaqQr

- - 8t.uoifHilliiS O!!ice

Psychology

Tru~t Fund/Laundry ·---- Religious Service~

Unicor Education !l.ac:rQat:ioo

HQalth Servtce:J

Corrac~ional Svcs

Facilities

safety

ISH/Mailroom/~ecords

Adm.ini•t:rMtion

Part C: Informal Resolution Attempt

Issue E\esolvad/ Roi!liG! Granted

J.. COlllmQnU; ~ ~it.

r~~ua unrasolved/
- No Reli•f Gran~gd

Coaa.enta:

un...bhl l'o Address

Cormtent~:

rssue/Reiarred ro~

o - cr 7- 7 It!l'U.!I~Q Signature:A--.,_~ ' ~ ~- Drill!II:

Staff Si9nc~

~

Date:

:Jnit Man;/.tr• ll Slq:t-.I:UL:II~

)

/

~

~ Coun,eLor's Tr.ackinq

Dati!: ~z../I_

Trao::Jcing J

1!:'.1~ oau

·• 20 Day~

Fo:rua hsued

81?-9 !.~3U1Jd

ap.:.g Return$d

EXHIBIT 24 133

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 135 of 372 Page ID #:138
INFORMAL RESOLUTION This is in response to your Request for Informal Resolution dated 07-30-09. You recently indicated because you are deaf you are having a difficult time communicating with Health Services staff. You stated you cannot understand or communicate effectively with people who do not understand American Sign Language (ASL) . Contact has been made with Health Services staff who have been unaware of your recent problems communicating. Since your arrival on 10-11-2007, they have attempted to work with you to overcome your disability by exchanging and sharing written messages. It appeared this procedure was mutually successful and there was an understanding obtained between you an Health Services staff. It is unfortunate, you are beginning to experience problems communicating. Currently, however, we do not have staff who are skilled in ASL. Nevertheless, this maybe a skill that we could explore in more detail when new staff or new hires are being considered for employment at USP Hazelton.
R.
EXHIBIT 24 134

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 ft-:Of.li:AL l1H'\DN l~lHJSrRif.S. INC Page 136 of 372 Page ID #:139 I.E.-.\-HIW{lftTH. KAN'i,\S

U.S. I>F.PARTMENT OF JUl>IICF. Federal Bureau of PriStlns

REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

From: Bryant. David, D.
I.Al>T NAME. tlRl>T. l\IIDDLE INITIAl.
Part A- JNMATE REQUEST

06104-016
ltt:G. Nil.

C-1
LNIT

U,S.P. Hazelton
INl>TITIJTION

I am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I cannot understand or communicate effectively with people who do not know ASL. I am unable to understand or communicate effectively with the prison's guards. Among other problema, this means that I cannot hear calls for line-up.

For these reasons, I am requesting an ASL interpreter for communications with the prison's guards and a vibrating pager for calls to line-up and other routine announcements. And, 1 request that the prison's guard who knows ASL be assigned to my unit as much as possible. As an alternative, I request a transfer to a priso with other deaf inmates and programs for the deaf.

DATE
Pllrt 8- RESPONSE

DATE

WARDEN OR REGIONAL DIRECTOR

CASE NUMBER:---------

Part C- RECEIYf

CASE NUMBER:---------

Return to:

Bryant, David, D.

06704-016

C-1

U.S.P. Hazelt

SUBJECT:

_

_

_

LAST NAME. FIRST. _________

MIDDLE ____

INITIAL ____

_

_

_

_

_

_

REG __

NO. __

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

UNIT ___

_

_

_

_

_

INSTITUTION _ _ _ _ _ ___

DATE

RECIPIENT'S SIGNATURE ISTAFF MEMBER)

BP-229..t.PRIL t

EXHIBIT 24 135

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 137 of 372 Page ID #:140

UNITED STArES PENJ:'.rENTIA:aY HAZELTON

- IN

r

oRM

UQOES1' FOR. AtlM'I'N'XST'IU\.T'IVZ
AL :RESOLUTION B'OBM Gener

a~ l P% opulation~

tJJf.J

INMATE'S NAME:: David Bryant

REG. No.o6704- 016 UNIT: c - 1

1. Specific Complaint:

1 am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I cannot understand or communicate effectively with people who do not know ASL. I am unable to understand or communicate

•I-

effectively with the prison's guards. Among other problems, this means that I cannot hear calls for line-up.

2. Relief Requested:
ASL interpreter for communications with the prison's guards and a vibrating pager for calls to line-up and other routine announcements. That the prison's guard who knows ASL be assigned to my unit as much as possible. As an alternative, a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and programs for the deaf.

Part B: Referred To:

- ~rood Svc
St)Siiness Office

onit Manaq~r ,..::{_ Psychology

Unicor ltducat:ion

· - Tru3t Fund/L4undry
- - HG!alth Services
safety

Rsliqioua Services COrrQCt:ional Svcs
ISM/Mailroom/~ecorda

- Rae.eaation
Facilities Adminhtration

Part C: Informal Resolution Attempt

Issue Resolv•dl R101li<21f Granteci

k COIIIIIQnus; ~ fl.L ~~)..._~ ~fb"t...c..
-11/

I~sutl Unresolved/
- No Relief Grant:ad

Comments:

!JrU~.blQ l'o Address

Co11111ent:~:

T~~ue/Ret•rr•d TO:

n__ " Intt14t.l2 Sign4ture: ~~~\)

___J--

Ol!ltt.~l

Staft Si9na~

~

Date:

emit Manllg"r',. s-"Iq:tatu.r~~
(f /

' Cou~-'~lor'' Tr.ackinq

1- ::,o·- 9
\
J
Date:e/;z/5 I

·rta.clcing- f

ll:'ll"nt Oatl2

... 20 Days

Fort~~ hsu&d

oP-9 I-5.sued

ap.:.g Returned

EXHIBIT 24 136

- ..., Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 FF.Oti.R-'l rRISON 1:-tHtbfkli:~. INC Page 138 of 372 Page ID #:141
!.£,WE.NWOKT1!. KANSAS

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Federal Bureau nt' Pri:-.t»1.~

REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

T."-Pf' or 11.\t' ho/1-poinl f't'"· If uuadmrem,f cJTt' nt:t!ded..whmit four COJiie.r. ,·ldditiona/ in.~·tnlt'tiOIIS mr ret't'r.\'t'.

Fn•m: ___s~ry~a~n~t~·~D~a~v~i~d~·~D~·~-------------I.Ai>T NAMF.. nR!iT, MIDI>I.F. INITIAL Part A- INMATE REQUEST

06704-016
REI;, NO.

C-1
UNIT

U.S.P. Hazelton
INS"ITnrrtON

I am a deaf inmate. Since I am deaf, I am unable to hear even loud noises. I am unable to hear the prison's alarms. I miss important warnings and announcements. For these .reasons, I am requesting a strobe or vibrating alarm or a vibrating pager. As an alternative, I request a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and with programs for the deaf.

DATE
Part 8- RESPONSE

SIGNATURE OF REQUESTER

DATE

WARDEN OR REGIONAL DIRECTOR

ORH>INAI.: RETURN TO INMATE

CASE NUMBER: - - - - - - - - - - -

Part C- RECEIPT

CASE NUMBER: - - - - - - - - -

Rerum rn:

Bryant, David, D.

06704-016

C-1

U.S.P. Hazelt<

SUWECT:

__

_

LAST NAME. FIRST. MIDDLE INITIAL _______________________

__

_

__

_

_

_

REG. NO. _____

_

__

_

__

_

__

UNIT ____

_

_

__

_

INSTI _____

TUTION _ _ _ __

DATE

RF.CIPJF.NT'S SIGNA TURF. <STAFF MEMBER)

BP-229 APRIL I

EXHIBIT 24 137

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 139 of 372 Page ID #:142
$1

INMATE'S 'NAME: David Bryant

REG. No.o6704-0l6 UNIT: c - 1

1. Specific Complaint:
·- l am a deaf inmate. Since I am deaf, I am unable to hear even loud noises. I am unable to hear the prison's
alarms. I miss important warnings and announcements.

2. Relief Requested:
Strobe or vibrating alanns or a vibrating pager. As an alternative, a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and with programs for the deaf.

Part 8: Referred To:

- - - l?"ood Svc

L . oni.t Manaqla'r

- - a•.uoino.ss Of!ice

Pl!ychology

Trust Fund/Laundry ·---- Religious Services

Onicor Education Rllc.raoltio.n

Health Serv.ic•:s

corractional Svcs

Facilities

safety

ISM/Hail room/Records

Administration

Part C: Informal Resolution Attempt

Issue Resolved/ Rali.af Granted

k l, ~ ¢-~ COJIIIIIQnt4;

!~~ua Onr~solved/
- No Relief GrantQd

C~nta:

on...bllil 1'o Address

Co11111ents:

!~sue/Referred To:A
Inlll.)l.COl SiQnature: ~ ~(,) ~ _,

~
Jd-1

7 - Oat~tl

Sta!t Sign4tUCQ~

~

Date:

unit: Managltr':. ~:tittiU·w: ~
~ v

"\
~n.s~lor' ~ Tr.acltinq

Tra.;l<ing f

~
IS'IIIilnt Oolite

·~ 20 Days

Fo~ !S3Ue<:f

70-9
Date: d/lz./r

SP-9 r.,sued

ap.:.g Return$d

EXHIBIT24 138

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 140 of 372 Page ID #:143
INFORMAL RESOLUTION success This is in response to your Request for Informal Resolution dated 07-30-09. You indicate because you are deaf you have a difficulty hearing loud noises and alarms. You request strobe or vibrating alarms or a vibrating pager as an alternative or a transfer to another prison with other deaf inmates. As an inmate you are under constant supervision by correctional staff. In case of emergencies and or alarms staff are accountable for your whereabouts and will insure you are notified and your safety maintained. In addition, fire alarms meet visual compliance with strobe and inmates are not allowed to possess any electronic device that is not approved by the Federal Bureau of Prisons.
EXHIBIT 24 139

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 141 of 372 Page ID #:144

l

ft'tkral Bur~au of Prisons

REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

T_vp~ or use hu/1-poilll fJen. If 111/w.:hnwm.'f ar~ ne,•tled, .mhmit fimr <'opi~s. Ad(/irional in.unwtioll.'i 011 rev~r.-.t>.

From: Bryant, David, D.

06704-016

C-1

I.J\!>7 NAME. t'IR.,7, MIUOU: INITIAL

REG. NO.

Purt A- INMATE REQUEST

U.S.P. Hazelton
INI>'TITUTION

I am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I cannot understand or communicate effectively with people who do not know ASL. I am unable to participate effectively in the prison's work programs because 1 am unable to understand or communicate with work managers and coordinators.

1 am requesting an ASL interpreter for work programs in order to understand and communicate with work managers and coordinators. As an alternative, I request a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and programs for the deaf.

66- 1'3-j DATE Part Jl... RESPONSE
•

DATE

WARDEN OR REGIONAL DIRECTOR

1/di!Uiis/1«1...,. tJW ,...,_,., 1011,..., _ . tto til4/ltgiufoul Dinmw. Y<HU'_.,t ••nb<IW<i...till tiN if•P>ul Oflk• widrht 10<t01ntllvt/#pl1/lllldlttl ojtlfh , . . _

ORJ(;JNAL: RETURN TO INMATE

CASE NUMBER: - - - - - - - - -

Part C- RECEIPT

CASE NUMBER:---------

Return to:

Bryant. David, D.

06704-016

C-1

u.s.P. Hazelt•

SUWECT:

_

_

_

LAST NAME. _______

FIRST. MIDDLE ________

INITIAL ____

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

REG. ___

NO. __

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

UNIT ___

_

_

_

_

_

_

INSTITUTION _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _

DATE

RECIPIENT'S SIGNATURE (STAFF MEMBER)

BP-229 .t.f'RIL 1

•
EXHIBIT 24
140

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 142 of 372 Page ID #:145

UNITED STArKS PENJ:'l'E.N'l'IARY HAZELTON
REQUES'l' FOR ADMIN:tSTRATIVE REMEDY
INFO~ RESOLUTION FORM - General ~opulation

INMATE'S NAME: David Bryant

REG. No.o6704-0l6 UNIT: c - 1

1. Specific Complaint:

· ·:r am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I cannot understand or

f-

·communicate effectively with people who do not know ASL. I am unable to participate effectively in the

·prison's work programs because I am unable to understand or communicate with work managers and

t-coordinators.

2. Relief Requested:

ASL interpreter for work programs in order to understand and communicate with work managers and

-

coordinators. As an alternative, a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and programs for the deaf.

-

Part B: Referred To:

r-ood Svc - - -
8•;sin.;;:s~ Office

onit. Manag6tr · - ·
Psycholog-y

· - Tru3t Fund/Laundry
- - Health Services
sa!ety __

Religiou~ Service3 corrgcr.ional svc~
ISM/Mailroom/~ecord~

Part C: Informal Resolution Attempt

I!l:!Ue Re3olved/ R•ill i~f Granted

COIIlii\Qnt.s;

Unicor Educat.ion Recraat.ion
Facilities Adrnil\istration

I~$ue Unre~olved/
- No Reliaf Grant.Qd

Coanent3:

UnCLbll:l To Address

Co!Mients:

r~sue/Referred To:~
Ir!!l~.J.te Signature: ~ c--r\) Y~
......
St11!f Sign4tU.CQ;

-SJ--

Date1 { - -z.., () - 9

Date:

r

Unit Managar' s S.iq:~<~.tw:w:

Date:

• Tracking

Svlilnt oat<?

Coun~elor·~ Tr.ackiog

• 20 Days

Fo:rm Issued

3P-9 I-'33Ued

ap.:..g Returned

EXHIBIT 24 141

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 143 of 372 Page ID #:146
EXHIBIT 25

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 144 of 372 Page ID #:147

Office of the Warden

United States

tment of Justice

Federal Bureau o~ Prisons

United States Penitentiary -

Hazelton

Post Office Box 450

Sky View Drive

Bruceton ~lls, West Virqinia 26525 (304) 379-5000

August 31, 2009

Mr. Matthew Fitzwater, Attorney at Law 125 Broad Street New York, New York 10004

RE: Bryant, David Register Number 06704-016

Dear Mr. Fitzwater:

This David

letter is Bryant,

in an

respon inmate

se to curre

your ntly

i

letter dated ncarcerated

July at the

24, 2009, United S

t

rega ates

rdi

n

g

Penitentiary (USP) Hazelton, Bruceton Mills, West Virginia. You have

requested under Program Statement that inmate Bryant be given reason

1330.16, Administrative Remedy able accommodation of having

Program

administrative remedy responses e-mail or facsimile. You state communicate the content of any explain his further obligations in a timely matter.

from any level, this will allow such response to under the Admi

sent to your office via you to effectively inmate Bryant, and
nistrative Remedy Process

Inmate Bryant arrived at USP Hazelton on August 8, 2005. Since has developed a positive rapport with staff and has interacted to resolve numerous issues. Due to inmate Bryant's disability, have maintained communication via written correspondence, which past appears to have been successful.

then, he with sta
staff in the

f

f

Inmate Bryant The intent of

has the

complete access to the Administrative Remedy Program. program is to informally resolve issues before a

hriirnneeomqstnepuaegoetsetrsnitstBayinfbrodyiorlasfinttayrtnt'ahsietAgorhdAetmpsfdpeoimnrorswiinosnstanirisraabdtltrilialyvmitetiayvpnerRnoteeovmRri.eedmudeAyseeddysidstthaipterpfioforgponrwrcaaoelmiglst rhy,sae,mdit hti. nei ni scoI nogr domi noaepmddrldeaftttioeeatdiiotmBhnra,yiananitndtati'nsii ns

t

an he

Administrative Remedy for processing. For that reason, the forms

received office.

from

your

office

on August

18,

2009

are

being

returned

to

your

EXHIBIT25 143

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 145 of 372 Page ID #:148 Page 2 RE: Bryant, David Register Number 06704-016 Due to security reasons, inmates do not have access to facsimile machines. However, to communicate via e-mail (TRULINCS) it is the inmates responsibility to obtain approval and assume all costs. Otherwise, Mr. Bryant can utilize the postal service and be responsible for the cost of all mailing to your office. Inmate Bryant also has access to a Telephone Device for the Deaf (TDD) at this institution. Additionally, we are currently awaiting a transfer which was submitted to the Designation and Sentence Computation Center for consideration of an Adjustment Purposes transfer on August 26, 2009. I trust that I have adequately addressed your concerns. If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact Richard Milton, Unit Manager at 304-379-5000.
2
EXHIBIT 25 144

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 146 of 372 Page ID #:149
EXHIBIT 26

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 147 of 372 Page ID #:150
125 BROAD STREET NEW YORK, N.Y. 10004-2498

September 28, 2009

By Hand

KimM. White Regional Director Mid Atlantic Regional Office Federal Bureau of Prisons 302 Sentinel Drive, Suite 200 Annapolis Junction, Maryland 20701

Re: Inmate David Bryant, Register Number 06704-016 Dear Regional Director White:

I write on behalf ofUSP Hazelton inmate David Bryant, Register Number

06704-016, who is deaf and communicates in American Sign Language ("ASL").

Enclosed please find seven Regional Administrative Remedy Appeals (BP-lOs) that Mr.

Bryant submits in an effort to enable him to become informed ofprison warnings and

announcements, participate in prison activities, and communicate with inmates and prison

staff, including guards, medical personnel, religious and spiritual leaders, educators, and

work personnel.

-

On July 24, 2009, I requested an accommodation from Warden James Cross so that I (and my colleagues) may help Mr. Bryant with the grievance process. Mr. Bryant had previously been unsuccessful in trying to complete the grievance process and planned to file new Informal Resolution Forms (BP-8s) following our legal visit on July 30, 2009. As I explained then, and again by letter dated August 18, 2009, this accommodation is necessary because Mr. Bryant communicates in ASL, a language with a complex grammatical structure that is without a one-to-one correspondence with English. Specifically, I requested that under PS 1330.16, § lOb and the Rehabilitation Act, Mr. Bryant be given the reasonable accommodation ofhaving a copy of any response to any level of his requests for administrative remedies be sent to me, his counsel, via email or facsimile. As I stated, this accommodation is necessary in order for Mr. Bryant to comply with the grievance process as his understanding and ability to

EXHIBIT 26 146

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 148 of 372 Page ID #:151

Regional Director White

-2-

communicate in English is limited. Additionally, I also requested a copy ofUSP Hazelton's Institutional Supplement toPS 1330.16, which is not otherwise publicly available, so that we can ensure that Mr. Bryant complies with USP Hazleton's guidelines. 1
After our scheduled legal visit, and without an accommodation, or any response from Warden Cross, Mr. Bryant filed seven BP-8s related to the subjects outlined at the beginning of this letter. Mr. Bryant received unsatisfactory responses to his BP-8s (including one non-response), and, as such, filed seven Requests for Administrative Remedy (BP-9s) under cover of my letter dated August 18, 2009.
On September 14,2009, I received Warden Cross's response to my July 24 Letter and Mr. Bryant's seven BP-9s.2 Warden Cross, ignoring our request for an accommodation under PS 1330.16, § 1Ob and the Rehabilitation Act, stated that "[i]nmate Bryant has complete access to the Administrative Remedy Program [and that it is his] responsibility to use the program in good faith and in an honest and straightforward manner." Warden Cross included no explanation as to how Mr. Bryant's use of the grievance process to address the prison's failure to accommodate his disability is somehow in bad faith. Furthermore, Warden Cross's refusal to grant an accommodation clearly contradicts his responsibility to "ensure that assistance is available for inmates who are illiterate, disable, or who are not functionally literate in English." PS 1330.16, § lOb. As detailed above, in my previous letters to Warden Cross and in Mr. Bryant's BP8s and BP-9s, Mr. Bryant is deaf and does not communicate in English. Although timely submitted, Warden Cross refused to process Mr. Bryant's BP-9s, "in order to maintain the integrity of the Administrative Remedy program" and said Mr. Bryant needed to "personally provide staff with the completed Administrative Remedy for processing." As Warden Cross's response to Mr. Bryant's BP-9s is unsatisfactory, Mr. Bryant is filing the enclosed BP-I Os.

To date, I have not been provided with a copy of this supplement.

2

Although Warden Cross's response is dated August 31, 2009, it was not

postmarked until 11 days later on September 11, 2009. Furthermore, Warden

Cross' letter did not acknowledge my August 18 letter.

EXHIBIT 26 147

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 149 of 372 Page ID #:152

Regional Director White

-3-

I am available at any time to discuss these issues. You can reach me by telephone, (212) 558-1632, email, fitzwaterm@sullcrom.com, or facsimile, (212) 2919282.
Respectfully yours,
F~ter 11~,1,f~) _!~
Matthew
(Enclosures)
cc: BOP Associate General Counsel Paul W. Layer (via email)

EXHIBIT 26 148

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 150 of 372 Page ID #:153

U.S. Department of Justit'e Federal Bureau of Prisons

Regional Administrative Remedy Appeal

Type or use ball-point pen. wtth this all ~1.

If attachments are needed, submit four copies.

One copy of the completed BP-229( fJ) including any anachments must he submined

From:

C';630\-G\,( ot\-lA t LSP rt:xe.\-b ()

REG. NO.

UNIT

INSTITUTION

Part A· REASON FOR APPEAL

o? ~~ 1

~--b.A\ <2.-l_

i (\ -T'ne

«

-tt:..ch:d

~ f> O.c,

,.q.:) \-u_.s beef' ('e-\='u.~ ~ ncl --t- ~ e

--\'or ~Y f'~~ 'n&o no--r lo<E:...oe__n

('e_~ c\ \ e cL

7-,2 7-7 DATE
Part B • RESPONSE

SIGNATURE OF REQUESTER

DATE

REGIONAL DIRECfOR

If dissatisfied with this response. days of the date of this response.

you

may

appeal

to

the

General

Counsel.

Your

appeal

must

be

received

in

the

General

Counsel's

Office

within

30

calendar

-

OPaRrtIGC I-NRAELC:ERIPETTURN TO INMATE CASE NUMBER:.~-:-:-~------ -...... ........... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - __... ---..~- __,; ~ ......:..·-·- ---...;....;. ~-- _.;.........;.........;... ....:,;..-.....;;._·....:.;,..-..;._·....;.....:-..;;;...;.;._ ..;...,o. ...................... - -

Rerumro: ______________________________________

CASENUMBER: ------------------

SUBJECT: ________L_A_S_T_N_A_M_E_. A_R_S_T_. _M_ID_D_L_E_l_N_IT_IA_L______________R_E_G_. N_O_.______________U_N_IT____________IN_S_T_IT_U_T_IO_N____

USPIVN

DATE

SIGNATURE. RECIPIENT OF REGIONAL APPEAL
EXHIBIT 26 149

BP·230(13)
UIUC '"tl'\1'\"'

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 151 of 372 Page ID #:154

UNIL'utl FFDEJI.AI. r.ti.SoN !NDtJSUllf.$, 1-Nt' Li-:AVi-.NWOitTR K:\NSA:"i

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Fclkn.l 8urc-<JU o( Pnsuns

REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

Typ..- or ust' btlll-pouu prm. 1/ tutadmrt'nll' ur~ nerdt'tl..~ubum fi'ur copi~s. Alldirioual tn.tlru,·tiflfl.f on rr-1't'r.ft'.

Fnun: Bryant, David, D.
tA."t"T NAME. t>IK.'ff, MJDOJ.I!: INITIAL
Part A- INMATE REQUEST

06704-016
itt-:(i. NO.

C-1
usrr

U.S.P. Hazelton
IN~TilVfiON

I aa a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language {"ASL"). I cannot understand or communicate effectively with people who do not know ASL. I am unable to participate in religious programs and services. 1 cannot understand or communicate with the prison's spiritual and religious personnel, who do not know ASL.

I am requesting an ASL interpreter for religious se~ices in order to understand and communicate effectively with spiritual and religious personnel. As an alternative, I request a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and with programs for the deaf.

DATE
Part JJ.. RESPONSE

OATE

WARDEN OR REGIONAL DIRECTOR

ORII<INAL: RETURN TO INMATE

CASE NUMBER:---------

Part C- RECEIPT

CASE NUMBER: - - - - - - - - -

Return <o:
SUWECT:

Bryant,
LAST ____

David, D.
NAME. FIRST. MIDDLE INITIAL ___________

_

_

06704-016
REG. NO. ______

_

_

_

C-1
UNIT ____

_

_

U•S. P. Hazel t•
INSTITUTION _ _ _ _ _ __

DATE

RECIPIENT'S SIGNATURF. iSTAFF MEMOF.RI

EXHIBIT 26 150

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 152 of 372 Page ID #:155

TJNITED STABS l?ENJ:'l'J:N'l'IARX HAZBL'l"ON ~S~ l!'Oa AtlbiDTIS'ntATIVZ itENEO'i
INJ'ORMAI. USOIIU':CJ:ON P'Oml - Qener~ l?opulatioi-

",J

INMATE'S NAME: David Bryant

REG.

T
No.06704-016 UNIT:

c -

1

1. Specific Complaint:

or____ ·~-.rJpcasroomomgnmrnaaeumdnlesi,caaafwntiednh·omesfeadfrteovecinctaieonvstde.klIIynccowoawinmtnhAmopStueunLonipcdlaeetrewstihannoAddmoorenrcoioctmaknmnoSuwinginAcaLStaLen.wgIuitaahmgtehue(n"apAbrSilseLot"no)'s.pIsapcritarincitinupoaatlteuannindderrreeslltiiaggniiooduuss

'I-

2. Relief Requested:

ASL interpreter for religious personnel.
the deaf.

religious services As an alternative,

in a

order to understand and transfer to a prison with

communicate effectively with spiritual and other deaf inmates and with programs for

Part 8: Referred To:

""OOd Svc

onit MAnaqQr 'i,_

a')"inQ:!II$ Offica

Psychology

· - Trust Fund/Laundry

Raliqious Service8

Hczalth Service"

COrrQCtional 3vcs

sa!ety

ISM/Mailrooml~ecords

Part C: Informal Resolution Attempt

Unicor iducat:ion
Ret~eation
Facilities Adlv.iniatrlltion

Issue Resolvad/
- - - Relief Grilllted

C011111o01nt.s: ~ ~~l

I¥"ue Onrm8olved/
- - No Rali•£ Granted

COIIII.entll:

u""'ble ra Address

Co1111ent.s:

J~sue/Reterred To:

Ir!llli1te SiQMture;~~ )
- / Staft' Sign.. ture:

~ .-.4-
~

0~'\!111
Date:

7-~(.)-q

A / ' :Jnit Manag11r'~ Slq~w:11:

~

Tracl<ing f

C~a~Lor'~ Tr.acking

~'<nt~ ~ ZO Daya

Fot"lll I~sued

/

/

Date :<i}//z_ / )

1 3P.9 Issued

ap.:.g Return<!ld

I

EXHIBIT26 151

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 153 of 372 Page ID #:156

INFORMAL RESOLUTION

This is in response to your Request for Informal Resolution dated 07-30-09. You recently indicated because you are deaf you are having a difficult time communicating with Religious Services staff. You stated you cannot participate in religious programs and services with people who do not understand American Sign Language (ASL).

Contact unaware

has been made with Religious Services staff who have been of your recent problems communicating. Since your arrival

on yo ap

10-11-2007, they have attempted to work with you ur disability by exchanging and sharing written m peared this procedure was mutually successful and

to overcome essages. It there was a

n

understanding obtained between you and the Religious Services

psaainnrrtoeadbcflofcye.oommunmsdhIuucatncovitceemiasdmtbinbueugeynnnifcaionanartmcdtiucnaongstmhe.asatpera,iuInnnnigyeddoaeudyr bodyatuihrtrieeaornebcso,uleimgpgniepinuraonmvnuiiiensosrgnioobunwtseohloorieeefxlhfistapgh.seieroaiueCCsnsshuciarsepprtreleoangditrnlayymo, us

however, we do not have staff who are skilled in ASL. Nevertheless, this maybe a skill that we could explore in more detail when new staff or new hires are being considered for

employment at USP Hazelton.

Date

EXHIBIT 26 152

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 154 of 372 Page ID #:157

Federal Bureau of Prisons

KegiOnat

Twyttphe tohrisuaseppbeaalll.-point pen. If attachments are n\ eeded• submi·l ~our copt·es. One copy of the completed BP-229( 13) including any attachments must b b .

'~' ~ ~ ~3::t\-Ot& "'"' TO.:>£c\ LAST NAME. FIRST. MIDDLE INmAL
\.JS]? fly bn"' Part A - REASON FOR APPEAL

REG. NO-. - - -

1 v 1 TUVNI\T

. ''"""'" 7-R - \ ~
INSTITUTION

w M'/ \~u~
~\lc\ B~~~

~.s

~ If' "\ e_. c:::::>.:ttC:Z. C.
o~h 'e-Cu~c..J ~

f\eeJ ~\ ()\'( -~e:sr- \ro.s

\e'\f"'e c\\cd

? --2?- ?-" DATE
Part B - RESPONSE

DATE

dIfaydsisosafttihsfeieddatwe iothf

tthhiiss

rreessppoonnssee. ,

you

may

appeal

10

the

General

Coonse1.

Your

appeal

must

be

recet.ved

.
10

the

GeRnEeGraIlOCNoAuLnsDeIlR'sEOCfTfiOcRe within

30

calendar

Op~R;I(G;-IN:A:L-:RERCE~TU_.R,..N_-.T"O"IN"M"A'-T.E,...------- -::-.-=---=---=--.,.._.,.-,c ~--...,.-~AS~ ~~~BER~ ----· ---~-~-~- ~- ~- -

CASENUMBER: - - - - - - - - - - -

~U~N=IT~----------~!N:S~TITUT~~~~O:N R~um~:-------L-AS~T~N~A~M~E.~F-IR-ST-. -M-ID-D-LE-I-N-IT-IA-L----­

SUBJECT:---------------------------------------------R-E_G_._N_o_.____________

___

USPLVN

DATE

SIGNATURE, RECIPIENT OF REGIONAL APPEAL

BP-230(13) JUNE 2002

EXHIBIT 26 153

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 155 of 372 Page ID #:158

u.S. ot:PARTMENT OF JU~IIf.:E
FetJcraJ Bureau nf PrismlS

UNK'tlil: R:Of.lAI. I'Rt<;UN l~llt!~IE.$ IN(; li:AVF.NWillllH. KAN't~:i
REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

Frrnn: ___B~r~y~a~n~t~·~D~a~vAi~d~·~D~,---------------- 06704-016

C-l

I.A"T NAMF., ~IIC>T. MIDOU: INITIAL

fUX;. NO.

Part A- INMATE REQUE.'.'T

U.S.P. Hazelton
IN,TinmON

I am a deaf inmate and I cqmmunicata in American Sign Language ("ASL"). 1 cannot understand or communicate effectively with people who do not know ASL. 1 am unable to participate in the prison's education programs and vocational programs because I cannot understand or communicate effectively with the instructors or other students.

For these reasons, 1 am requesting an ASL interpreter for the education programs and vocational programs in order to understand and communicate effectively with the instructors and other students. As an alternative, 1 request a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and programs for the des£.

afJ- I) -7
DATE
Part B- RESPONSE

DATE

WAROEN OR REGIONAL. DIRECTOR

If dhultU./iM witlt 11th rr~. JfHI 11WJ "''JJfttlo du .,p,..~ Oirttlw, YM,.IiiPP"l tiiiUik rttri.-nl ill tlr, R'fU»tal OjJk1 wUirU. JtJc.W.Mr t14,1 fl{du 4t1U 11ftJW ruptm::

-~~~~~.:._R_:~~~~~~M_!-!_~---------------------- CASE NUMBER:----------------------

Part C- RECEIPT

CASE NUMBER:----------

Rccum to: Bryant, David, D.

06704-016

C-1

U.S.P. Hazelt•

SUBJECT:

_

LAST NAME. FIRST. MIDDLE __________________

INmAL _____

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

REG. ___

NO. __

_

_

____

_

_

UNIT ____

_

_

_

_

_

_

INSTITUTION _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _

Of\TE

RECiPIENTS SIGNATURE I STAFF MEMRf.R)

BP-229
~Ill

EXHIBIT 26 154

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 156 of 372 Page ID #:159

- INJ'TOJUN~QITOUE'&DSOS'LSl'UT'!.J'AO!JRf:t.OS.NAPDBBM'ONJBJlM:n'lS'D't'Rl'QIAAe!Rnn%eV~Z&HllAUZ!:PENLEoTDpOYuNlatio~

ar-l

INMATE'S NAME: David Bryant

REG. NO .06704-016 UNIT: c - 1

l. Specific Complaint:

- -·t·.-1ehcdaoeummicnmaastutidronuenicacptafortireonsgmeorfaafrmteoectstahianvenderdlsyItvucwodociemtanhtmtispo.uennoaiplclapetreowgihnroaAmdmos ebnreoicctaaknunsoSewigI ncAaLSnaLnn.ogtIuuaanmgdeeu(rn"satAabnSledLt"oo)r.pcIaocrmtaincminpuoanttieucnaindteetrhesfetfaepncrditsivooenrl'ys with

2. Relief Requested:

ocAotShmeLmr idunenteaircfpairnteemteearftfefeoscratitnvhdeelpyerdowugicrtahatmitohsnefpoinrrosttghrrueacdmtoesarsfa.nanddvoocthaetirosntauldpenrotsg.rAams saninaoltredrenrattoivue,nadetrrsatnasnfderatnoda prison with

Part 8: Referred To:

E"ood Svc

unit Manager-;/._

!lt.>:ilinQSS Office

Psychology

Trust 1"\il"ld/l.aundry · - Religious Services

Health Services
!la:fety __

corractiona.l svc:s
ISM/Mailroom/~ecord:s

Part C: Informal Resolution Attempt

Unicor Education ReeraatiOJl Fl!lcilities Admol.lliatretion

Issue Resolved/
- - - Rtilit11! Gr!Sllted

COIIIIIQnta: ~ c;._-14.-<:,J,,<J_

l»4ue Onrasolved/
- No ~eli•£ ~rantad

C<xriMnt:s:

on..blt;o l'o AG!dress

CO!IIIlent:s:

!~sue/Referred To:

ItUI\Gt~ Signature: ~r. ~

I
~- ---ts?f--

Oat:lll

Staft' Sign.. tuce:~

~

__,.-L ;Jnit

Manag11r's

:--...
Slq:'"'·-··

)

O.te:

CY-

../ Colll'l~IILor' ~ Tr.ar:Jdnq

{-'?C) 8,//z/~

7
J
Date: X:/J.t-1<\ 7

rrar.l<in<; J

e:v"nt DolttQ

• 20 Days

E'o~ hsued

3P•9 Issued

ap.:.g Returntl:d

EXHIBIT 26 155

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 157 of 372 Page ID #:160
INFORMAL RESOLUTION This is in response to your Request for Informal Resolution dated 07-30-09. You recently indicated because you are deaf you are unable to participate in the prison's education programs and vocational programs. You stated you cannot participate or communicate effectively with instructors or other s~udents who do not understand American Sign Language (ASL) . Contact has been made with Educational Services staff who have indicated ~hey have attempted to work with you in the past and provide you with educational programs based on your special needs. However, it appears you have demonstrated very little motivation to engage with the educational staff to assist you in educational and vocational programming. I encourage you to meet with the Educational Supervisor who is aware of your needs and can assist you in your educational programming.
Date
EXHIBIT 26 156

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 158 of 372 Page ID #:161

Federal Bureau of Prisons

Type or use ball-point pen·. If attachments are needed. submit four copies. One copy of the completed BP-229( 13) including any auachments must he submitted
l with this appeaL

G~c.n-r u ~dOt( I( <St-\0\ ns? From:

\l:C

:0

&.=x.;l:bQ

LAST NAME. i=JRSiMIDDLE INITIAL

REG. NO.

UNIT

INSTITUTION

'

Part A· REASON FOR APPEAL

1-2?-l DATE
Part B • RESPONSE

o&~~ SIGNATURE OF REQUESTER

DATE

REGIONAL DIRECTOR

If dissatisfied with this response. you may appeal to the General Counsel. Your appeal must be received in the General Counsel's Office within 30 calendar

days of the date of this response.

ORIGINAL: RETURN TO INMATE

CASE N U M B E R : - - - - - - - - -

Part C • RECEIPT

CASENUMBER: -----------------

Return to:-------------------------------------SUBJECT: ________L_A_S_T_N_A_M_E_. A_R_S_T_. _M_ID_D_L_E_I_NI_T_IA_L______________R_E_G_. N_O_.______________U_N_IT____________IN_S_T_IT_U_T_IO_N____

USPLVN

DATE

SIGNATURE. RECIPIENT OF REGIONAL APPEAL

BP-230(13) JUNE 2002

EXHIBIT 26 157

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 159 of 372 Page ID #:162

UNK'Oit ~H)ff!AL P1t.ISiJN \M>I.!STlUt~.INC Ll:i\Vl:I\IWiliHlt i<:.ANSAS

U.S. OEPART\IENT OF JU!.TICE Federal Bureau llf Pri!->lms

REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

T.\Pt' or USt' hall-pmm pt'n. If uttuamrt>uiJ ure ncc-Jt'cl. \Ubmir jour t'fiJiiO. AdditimmlmHrunimu mt rt:'\'t'r:>t'.

From: Bryant. Dayid. D.
LAST NAME. FIRST, MIDDLE INITIAL
Part A- INMATE REQUEST

06704-016
MEG. NO.

C-1
UNIT

U.S.P. Hazelton
IN~'TITUTION

I am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"), I have difficulty understanding spoken English. I am unable to understand and enjoy television because the closed-captioning is not turned on.

For these reasons, I am requesting closed-captioning be enabled on a prison television available to me. As an alternative, I request a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and with programs for the deaf,

DATI!
Pan 8- RESPONSE

OATE

W!!.R.DEN OR REGIONAL OUlECTOR

ORIGINAL: RETIJRN TO INMATE

CASE NUMBER:---------

CASE NUMBER:---------

Pan C- RECEIPT

Rerum to: Bryant, David, D.

06704-016

C-1

U.S.P. Hazelt•

SUWECT

_

___

LAST ____

NAME, FIRST. MIDDLE INITIAL ______________________

_____

__

REG. NO. _________

__

__

_____

UNIT ____

__

___

__

INSTITUTION ___________

DATE

R.F.CTPIENT'S SIGNATURE tSTAFF MF.MRER)

BP-229 APAR J

EXHIBIT 26 158

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 160 of 372 Page ID #:163

INMATE'S NAME: David Bryant 1. Specific Complaint:

REG. No.o6704-016 UNIT: c - 1

1ospnao.mkeandEenagfliinsmh.aIteamandunIacbolemtmo uunnidceartsetainndAamnedriecnajnoySitgelnevLiasniognuabgeeca(u"AseStLh"e)c. lIohseadv-ecdapiftfiiocnuilntyg

understanding is not turned

•

1-

2. Relief Requested:

That closed-captioning be enabled prison with other deaf inmates and

on a prison television available with programs for the deaf.

to

me.

As

an

alternative,

a

transfer

to

a

Part 8: Referred To:

- - - Food 3vc

onit Manager ~

a.,..inllss O.t"t'ice

Psychology

· - Tru:~t FUnd/Laundry

Religious Services

aealth Services

corrgctional Svcs

safety

ISN/Mailro~/Qecords

Part C: Informal Resolution Attempt

Onicor Education Rote.eeatio.o. Facilitin AdnliA!•t:ration

Is:~ue Resolv•dl
- - - R.;oliat Grlltlted

~ CQlla!IQnt.a '

~l

r~~ue unresolved/
- No Reli•£ Granted

COIIll!llants:

on..blQ To Address

Comments:

Issue/Reterred Ir!Jl\o:>U Signatu

To: re:

..-..

,I\

..J'7-;_:__J_)

" " ~I

> . . ~ Staff Sign.. ture:
Unit Man~ger' s (f'l""tu.t:ll: ~ _)_

oat.. , Date:

/(/

fo3eLor'!.l T:~;acldnq

7- ":?C)- 9
Dato!l: S/t-z' .-/JI

Tracl<ing J

IOVOi~

• 20 Days

Fo:t111 haued

3P•9 r.s.sued

BP-9 Retu:med

i

! i

EXHIBIT 26 159

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 161 of 372 Page ID #:164
INFORMAL RESOLUTION success This is in response to your Request for Informal Resolution dated 07-30-09. You indicate because you are deaf you are unable to understand and enjoy television because the closed captioning is not turned on. A television in C-1 has been designated with closed captioning. If there are problems with this television you need to inform the unit officer or unit staff.
Manager
EXHIBIT 26 160

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 162 of 372 Page ID #:165

U.S. Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Prisons

Regional Administrative Remedy Appeal

If attachments are needed. submit four copies. One copy of the completed BP-229( 13) including any attachments must he submitted

From:
Part A- REASON FOR APPEAL

ex; 3-0 tj -0\L REG. NO.

t kSI\? +k.:zs: lto n

UNIT

INSTITUTION

0\y ('"~'-less+ I
end 'B\=J-~ '<\eed fu r (Y\y

(' <2rr\e_c.t\cd,

DATE
Part 8 - RESPONSE

SIGi:tATUREOfREQUESTE

DATE

REGIONAL DIRECTOR

If dissatisfied with this response. you may appeal to the General CounseL Your appeal must be received in the General Counsel's Office within 30 calendar

______ days of the date of this response.

ORIGINAL:

~--~~--------~ RETURN T..O........ INMATE CASENUMBER: ....__._.._-

-:,.,;,_-~-~----------~--~--..;...._~~--~-·-~-~-~.;.;;....;.;.;;;......;;;~

Part C - RECEIPT

CASENUMBER: -----------------

Return to: SUBJECT:

_ -_-_-_-_- L_AS- _T N_-A_M-E_.-A_R-S_T- ,_M_ - ID_ D-L_E-I_ N- IT_IA-_L - _ _ -_-_

_

_

_

_R_EG_. N_O_.

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

_U_ NIT_

_

_

_

_

_

_

_INS_TI_TU_TI_ON__ _

DATE

SIGNATURE. RECIPIENT OF REGIONAL APPEAL
EXHIBIT 26 161

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 163 of 372 Page ID #:166

U.S. DEPAJIThiENT OF JUSTICE
Federal au.... of Pri50ftl

UNICOA. FEDE1Ul. PI:ISOPII tf\IDUS J'IJ£3. INC. L£..\VENWownt. X:t\J'lJAS
REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

Fn1111: Bryant, David, D.

06704..1116

C-1

LAST NAME., FlltST. MJOOI.E INITIAL

RI!G.NO.

Part A-INMATE REQUEST

U.S.P, Hazelton
INsrrnrnoN

I am a deaf inmate and I coaaunicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I cannot understand or communicate effectively witb people who do not knov ASL, 1 aa unable to understand or com.unicate effectively witb medical staff and healthcare providers, including mental healthcare professionals and pharmacists.

I aa requesting an ASL interpreter for communicating witb medical staff and healthcare providers, including mental healthcare professional& and pharmaciste. A. an alternative, I request a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and prograae for the deaf.

DATil
Part B- RESPONSE

SIGNATIJRB OF REQUI!STER

,__. ___ DAT11
1/~-----------·~~-

._,_.W_A_RD0EN/IOWR R_EOlI#ON_AL.,D.IoREfC_TO_II of.. _

ORIGINAL: ll£TUJtN TO INMATE

CASE NUMBEll:..:::========

Part C- RECEIPT

CASE NUMBER:---------

Rerum to: Bryant. Dayid. D.

06704-Ql6

C-1

U.S.P. Bazalt

SUWECT:

__

_

_

LAST NAME. FIRST. MIDDLE __________________

INITIAL ______

_

_

_

_

_

REO. NO. _____________

_

_

_

_

UNIT ______

_

_

_

____

_I_N_ST_IT_U_T_IO_N_

_

DATE

RECIP1ENT"S SIGNATURE <STAFF MEMBER)

-·.,.__

EXHIBIT 26 162

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 164 of 372 Page ID #:167

INMATE'S NAME: David Bryant

REG. No.06704-0l6 UNIT: c - 1

1. Specific Complaint:

!-·ecIpfohafmamercmmtaiuavdcneeiilsycatafswt.ienitmehfafmetecetadinvicdeallIyscwtoaimfthfmapnuednoiphcleaeatelwthihncoaArdemopenrrooictvaikndneoSrwsig, niAnLcSlaLundgIinuagamgmeue(n"naAtbaSlleLhte"o)a.lutIhncdcaaenrresntoaptnroudfneodsrescriosotnmaanmldsuaonnridcate

•r-

2. Relief Requested:

pArSoLfesinsitoenrparlestaenr dfoprhcaormmmacuisntisc.aAtisnganwaitlhtermneadtiivcea,l for the deaf.

staff and a transfer

htoeaaltphrciasroenpwroitvhidoetrhse,ridncelaufdiinnmgamteesnatanldhperaoltghrcaamres

Part 8: Referred To:

- - - rood .Svc

onit Manaqoar .£.__

E!~J.winGtss Office

Psychology

· - Trust ~~/Laundry
Health Service• safety

Relioious Services
- - Corractional Svcs
ISH/Mail room/Records

Part C: Informal Resolution Attempt

Unicor ltducation Racreatio.n FD.ciliti.a klllli!U.•tr•tion

I.s11ue Resolvad/
- - - RJal iGf Gr!lllted

k_ J.. $<..- COIIllllQnt.s:

~

r .."ue tlnrlasolved/
- No Reli•f arantad

Ccmnenta:

Unabloa l'o Address

COillllents:

!~sue/Referred TO~

7- -or Ir!luatl2 Signature:~ ':,. -~ 'B.-~.

Steft Si9na~

~

:Jnit r1a.nt.l.._r•,. Slq:~<~.tu.t:ll~

O~ttt: Date:

1 7._ \/'

~ Coun,elor's T~aekinq

~0

Date: ~?'- /,-

'l'ra<:!rinq f

I!Ni.nt Datoa

• 20 Oayll

Fo:c111 rnued

BP-9 I-~~uttd

sp.:.9 Retu.rned

EXHIBIT 26 163

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 165 of 372 Page ID #:168

INFORMAL RESOLUTION

This is in response to your Request for Informal Resolution dated

07-30-09. You recently having a difficult time

indicated because you are communicating with Health

deaf you Services

are staff.

You stated you cannot understand or communicate effectively with

people who do not understand American Sign Language (ASL) .

Contact unaware

has been made with Health Services staff who of your recent problems communicating. Since

have your

been arrival

auoiyspnonpudu1erena0rdrs-fe1toiad1srnt-au2dtbh0niin0ialgs7itet,yop, rtbhobyteacoyyuiendeeaxuhdrcareevhbeabwenteagawgtsitneienemgmnnuiapntnytugeodadultsloyahtonaesrxiuwHnpcoegcerakrelwitsehwsrnfiicuStthetleernpayvnroiocdmubeelstteshosmesarstogaevefesrfw.c.aosmIateInt

communicating. skilled in ASL. explore in more

Currently, however, we do not have staff who are Nevertheless, this maybe a skill that we could
detail when new staff or new hires are being

considered for employment at USP Hazelton.

R.

Date

1

EXHIBIT 26 164

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 166 of 372 Page ID #:169

U.S. Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Prisons

Regional Administrative Remedy Appeal

'JYpe or use ball-point pen. with this appeal.

If annchments are needed. submit four copies.

One copy of the completed BP-229(13) including any anachments must be submitted

From:
Part A- REASON FOR APPEAL

06Jqt -Dl( RE .NO.

UNIT '

u& Vk~10C) INSTITUTION

\e.J \''\ y '~t.J..eet'J d. e.~c

\t\ '~ c o:tt-c:tch eel \0'1='-- ~~

G-nd 'b\)·~. 'vla.s 6~ \e-~u~c\ C...0d Thc.-

'(\eed +or ~y re.'i.:Jue:st- 'v-ns nat- beef)

\efY\ ed\ed

't-7?-7 DATE
Part B - RESPONSE

DATE

REGIONAL DIRECTOR

If dissatisfied with days of the date of

this response. this response.

you

may

appeal

to

the

General

Counsel.

Your

appeal

must

be

received

in

the

General

Counsel's

Office

within

30

calendar

ORIGINAL: RETURN TO INMATE

CASE NUMBER:---------

Part C • RECEIPT

CASENUMBER: - - - - - - - - -

Rerurnto'--------~~--~----~---------------LAST NAME, ARST, MIDDLE INmAL

REG. NO.

UNIT

INSTITUTION

SUBJECT:-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

tJSPIVN

DATE

SIGNATURE, RECIPIENT OF REGIONAL APPEAL
EXHIBIT 26

BP·230(13)
11 n.1c ?nn?

165

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 167 of 372 Page ID #:170

U.S. DEPARTMENT Of JU~"Tit:E Federal Bureau of Pri~nto;

!t~k"lll fHlf.l!i\l 1-'Jj:!"'i.l)~ l"'llU'>fRif.~.IN{"" I f..._\-f·.NWIMITH .KA/II'iAS
REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

Frmn: Bryant. Dayid. D.
I.MoT NAME, Wllo"T. MIDOU INITIAL
Part A- INMATE REQUEST

06704..016 R..:r;. ~n.

C-1
UNIT

U.S.P. Hazelton
IN~TITIJTION

I am a deaf inmate and l communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"), I cannot understand or communicate effectively with people who do not know ASL. I am
unable to understand or communicate effectively with the prison's guards. Among other problems, this means that I cannot hear calls for line-up.

For these reasons, I am requesting an ASL interpreter for communications with the prison's guards and a vibrating pager for calls to line-up and other routine
announcements, And, I request that the prison's guard who knows ASL be assigned to my unit as much as possible. As an alternative, I request a transfer to a priso with other deaf inmates and programs for the deaf.

DATE
Part 8- RESPONSE

DATE

WARDEN OR REGIONAL OfRECTOR

ORII;JNAL: Kt..IURN TO INMATE

CASE NUMBER: - - - - - - - - -

CASE NUMBER:---------

Part C- RECEIPT

Return ro:

Bryant, David, D.

06704-016

C-1

U.S.P. Hazelt

LAST NAME. FIRST. MIDDLE INITIAL

REG. NO.

UNIT

INSTITUTION

SUBJECT: ________________________________________________________________________

OATF.

RF.CIPIF.NT'S SIGNATURE I STAFF MEMBERl

BP-229 APRil t

EXHIBIT 26 166

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 168 of 372 Page ID #:171

O'NITl!:D S~S .I?BlUTZ.NTI.A:RY HAZELTON

Populatio~ rNrOU~®~ BSSOTL~ !!'OrRoNAtiJl!I'IOJ:lON:ItS-TRQATexnve:tr!&lUl !'.MI!!DY

o,U

INMATE'S NAME: David Bryant

REG. No.o6704-0l6 UNIT: c - 1

1. Specific Complaint:

ecI foafmmecmtaiuvdneeilcayafwtienitmehfafttehecetaipnvrdeislyIocnwo'simtghmupauerndoispc.laeAtewmihnoonAgdmooetnhroiectrakpnnroSowbiglenAmLSsaL,n.tghIuisaamgmeeu(an"naAsbSltehLat"ot).IucInacdnaennrsonttoahtneudanordrceacrsloltmsanfmodruonlriincea-tuep.

·I-
-

2. Relief Requested:

ASL interpreter for communications with the prison's other routine announcements. That the prison's guard possible. As an alternative, a transfer to a prison with

guards and a vibrating pager for calls to who knows ASL be assigned to my unit other deaf inmates and programs for the

line-up and as much as deaf.

Part B: Referred To:

l:'"ood Svc

Unit ManagQr ,.::{_

Eli)Oiin.;.s:s Office

PsycholO<JY

· - Trust Fund/L~undry

R.liqious Services

Health Servl ce"

Corractional svcs

safety

ISM/Mail room/Records

Part C: Informal Resolution Attempt

I:ssue Re:JOlv•dl
- - - -It! fl.<- RQli.at Grantect

C~nt.s:~

Unicor
Education
Ro;eereation Facilitin l'.dltliAi.stration
a..k-tA.G-4 t ~;:t»'~

-;4;

1~5ue Unra8olved/
- No Reli•f Grantad

C011111ents:

!Jr...,bl<i ro Addrees

Colllllentl!ll

f~sue/Reterred To:

U Ir!!llilt~ Siqnature: ~~~\)"

Ad-

Dat.. ,

Staft Siqn4~

~

Dato:

:Jnit Manllqltr'!l Sl~:u.tu.r/ ~
(£

/ \ ------ Coun,i!lor'~ Tr.ac~ioq

/-70- 9
J
oati!:Mz/~ -r

Trar.:l<iog t

a:v"nt. O.!lt~

·• 20 DilyS

Fot'lll !.5SU&d

BP-9 hsued

ap.:.g Return&d

EXHIBIT 26 167

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 169 of 372 Page ID #:172

U.S. Department of Justice

Regional Administrative Remedy Appeal

Federal Bureau of Prisons
J ' Twyitphe torhu~seabla.ll-point pen. If attachments are needed submit four copies. o ne copy of the completed BP-229( 13) including any auachments must be submitted

From: '"'"&rotAM~ifr~DLEINITIAL

~-0'6' REG. NO.

otu UNIT

tt.~& L@INSTITUTION

r'")

QP.aYr(t 'YAC·\\RyEASoON~r·FpO-R\-A·9P~PEs:A5,L\s~ ., de-b-:1d="~)\~(''If\~-~Tire

a_~
ore\ TYJe

-;o-p~,
f\e_~d-

..\Or "'Y ~~ 'r-Y'c:::, no-+ ~ rerne::i\ed

Part B • RESPONSE

DATE

dIfaydsisosafttihsfeieddatwe iothf tthhiiss

rreessppoonnssee..

you

may

appeal

to

the

General

Counsel.

Your

appea I

must

be

receJ. ved

.
In

the

GeRnEeGraIlOCNoAuLnsDeIlR'sEOCfTfiOceR within

30

calendar

__________ OPaRrItGCI~NAILT: R;E;TU;R-N ~TO-I-NM-A-TE--------

CASE NUMBER: - - - - - - - - - ._

CASENUMBER: -------------Return to: -----;-:--;:::;:-;-:-:-;:::-::::-::=-:-::=-:-------
SUBJECT:. _ _ _ _ _LA_ST_N_ AM_E._AR_ST_, M_ID_DL_E I_N!T_IA_L _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _RE_G_._N_o_._________u_N_I_T_ _ _ _ _ _~IN~STIT~:U~TI:O:N~-

USPLVN

DATE

SIGNATURE. RECIPIENT OF REGIONAL APPEAL
EXHIBIT 26 168

BP-230(13) JUNE 2002

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 170 of 372 Page ID #:173

U.S. m:PAIInn:NT Of JU~"TICF: Ft:dcral Bureau nl' Pri~l4l'\

UNICna Ff:OtiV•l f"MISON l~lliJ.\filE'i. t;'OC U!,Wii.... ¥.'0M.TII.KA.."i.'\,\';
REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

Fn>m: __~B~r~y~a~n~t~·~D~auv~i~d~·~D~·--------------­
I.A.'T NAMF.. nlb"T. ,\IIIIDLF: INITIAL
Part A- iNMATE REQUEST

06704-016
MEf.:. NO.

C-1
UNIT

U.S.P. Hazelton
I NSTITIJTION

I am a deaf inmate. Since I am deaf, I am unable to hear even loud noises. I am unable to hear the prison's alarms. 1 miss important warnings and announcements. For these reasons, I am requesting a strobe or vibrating alarm or a vibrating pager. As an alternative, I request a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and with programs for the deaf.

DATE
Part 8- RESPONSE

DATE

WARDEN OR REGIONAL DIRECTOR

OltJI;INAI.: HETURN TO INMATE

CASE NUMBER:-----------------

Part C- RECEIPT

CASE NUMBER:----------------

Rerurntn:

Bryant, David, D.

06704-016

C-1

U.S.P. Hazelt<

LAST NAME, FIRST. MIDDLE INITIAL

REO. ~0.

UNIT

INSTITUTION

SUWECT: _____________________________________________________________________________

OATF..

RECJPfF.NT"S SIGNATIJRF. ISTAFF MEMBF.RJ

BP-m
"""Ill

EXHIBIT 26 169

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 171 of 372 Page ID #:174
$/

INMATE'S NAME:: David Bryant

REG. No.o6704-0l6 UNIT: c - 1

l. Specific Complaint:

-

1 am a deaf inmate. Since I am deaf, I am unable to hear alarms. I miss important warnings and announcements.

even

loud

noises.

I

am

unable

to

hear

the

prison's

-

2. Relief Requested:

Strobe or vibrating alarms or a inmates and with programs for

vibrating the deaf.

pager.

As

an

alternative,

a

transfer

to

a

prison

with

other

deaf

Part 8: Referred To:

- - - rood Svc
El•~.;.in"ss Office

.L. onit Manag~r
Psychology

Onic:or !tduco!Uon

Tru~t Fund/Laundry ·---- Religious Services

!tt~ereatiotl

Health ServiceJJ

Corractional Svcs

Facilities

safety

ISM/Hailroom/Records

Admi.!Uatration

Part C: Informal Resolution Attempt

Issue Resolved/
- - - Rdid Granted

4-l. ~ ~~ COI!IIDQnt.a;

l~~ue Onr~solved/
- No Reli•f Grantad

COIII!Lents:

rJrs&bhl To Address

COlllllent.ll:

!ssue/Referred To:"

Ji/ IrUI~o>t.e Siqnature:-~~ ~ .--

/1

St~!t Signature~

~

7 Oat:tt•
Ollte:

·Jnit Han~g.,r' ~ ~;... tu.t:ll: ~

'\

v /.........

~nselor·~ Tr.acking

rracJring t

l!:'ll<ilnt O~te

r-:; 20 Days

Fo011 I~:sued

70-9
Date: tJ/)z,/r

3P..9 Issued

sp.:.g Return<td

EXHIBIT 26 170

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 172 of 372 Page ID #:175
INFORMAL RESOLUTION success This is in response to your Request for Informal Resolution dated 07-30-09. You indicate because you are deaf you have a difficulty hearing loud noises and alarms. You request strobe or vibrating alarms or a vibrating pager as an alternative or a transfer to another prison with other deaf inmates. As an inmate you are under constant supervision by correctional staff. In case of emergencies and or alarms staff are accountable for your whereabouts and will insure you are notified and your safety maintained. In addition, fire alarms meet visual compliance with strobe and inmates are not allowed to possess any electronic device that is not approved by the Federal Bureau of Prisons.
EXHIBIT 26 171

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 173 of 372 Page ID #:176

U.S. Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Prisons

Regional Administrative Remedy Appeal

u •d Type or use ball-point pen. If attachments are needed. submit four copies. One copy of the completed BP-229( IJ) including any attachments must be submitted
with this ap~

From:

~

g..-y,

C630i-O( sHlJ

rdP \-b;eho~

C\TNAMifiRfi:MiDDLE IN111AL

REG. NO.

UNI'f

INSTITUTION

Part A- REASON FOR APPEAL

\~e.s\<5 Je_..t.._\\e,l 'oC\ -1\--e q.-\\-cc2nej 'G:P-~

ro~-~} ~

~ <\e-9-ct~ o.nc)

<leeA -Qo r ""'/ r~u..e~ lrc..s. nc::rt-

(eJY)eJ \c: Ct
"

Part B · RESPONSE

SIGNATURE OF REQUESTER

DATE

REGIONAL DIRECTOR

If dissatisfied with this response. you may appeal to the Genernl Counsel. Your appeal must be received in the General Counsel's Office within 30 calendar

days of the date of this response.

ORIGINAL: RETURN TO INMATE

CASE NUMBER:---------

Part C - RECEIPT

CASE NUMBER:

Return to: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - SUBJECT: _ _ _ _ _ LA_ ST _ NA_ ME_ . FI_ RST_, M_ID_ DL_ E IN_m_AL_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _RE_ G. _ NO_ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _UN_IT_ _ _ _ _ _I_ NS_ TIT_ UT_ ION__

USPLVN

DATE

SIGNATURE. RECIPIENT OF REGIONAL APPEAL
EXHIBIT 26 172

BP-230(13) JUNE 2002

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 174 of 372 Page ID #:177

U~11.:otc Ft:OUt:,t,L l'lti;..IJN INOUSU;Lt:S.IN-l"

1

l.E.\\'8'1Wflltnt I(AN~,\S

U.S. Ut:PARTME~ Of JUSTICF. federal Bur..:au uf Pri;..on~

REQUESf FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

From: Bryant, David, 0.
L.\~T NAME, nR.o,T, MIUDU.: INITIAL
Part A- INMATE REQUEST

06704-016
Rl':G.NO.

C-1
UNIT

U.S.P. Hazelton
INSnTtrfiON

I am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I cannot understand or communicate effectively with people who do not know ASL. lam unable to participate effectively in the prison's work programs because 1 am unable to understand or communicate with work managers and coordinators.

1 am requesting an ASL interpreter for work programs in order to understand and communicate with work managers and coordinators. As an alternative, 1 request a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and programs for the deaf.

DATE
Part B- RESPONSE
•

DATE

WARDEN OR REGIONAL DIRECTOR

If dimu:Hfkd willt dUJ '"10f'W, J'OII mq tlppH/ 1r111t• Rcyioltal Oif"H:"tfW, Y4HUtlpJ"ttt/ MUdllw rr«iHtl bt tlv RtP;uM/ Offt« ,.,...10t:JilllfWd#lp # 11u dill# ofdW ",_,'

ORJ<;JNAL: RETURN TO INMATE

CASE NUMBER: - - - - - - - - -

CASE NUMBER: - - - - - - - - -

Part C- RECEIPT

Return to:

Bryant. David, D.

06704-016

C-1

U.s .P. Hazelt•

suruECT:

___

_

LAST NAME. FIRST.
_____________

MIDDLE INITIAL
___________

__

_

___

_

__

REG. NO.
_______

_

__

_

___

_

__U_N_IT__

___

_

__

_I_N_S_TI_T_U_TI_O_N_

DATE

RECIPIENT'S SICJNATURE (STAFF MEMBER I

BP-229 .'.Pf=lll1

•

EXHIBIT 26 173

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 175 of 372 Page ID #:178

UNITED S~S PE.NI'l'l!:NTIARY HAZELTON

REQUEST FOR A
INFORMAL ~SOLUTION

DMDUS
FORM

TRATIVE
- Gener

REMEDY
al Popu

l

ati

o

n

INMATE'S NAME: David Bryant

REG. No.o6704-0l6 UNIT: c - 1

l. Specific Complaint:

·t·-··rcpcaorooimmsrodmnain'usdanewtioacorafsrtik.enmperfaoftegecrtaainmvdeslyIbcewocimathumspeuenIoipacmlaeteuwnihnaobAldemoteonroiuctnakdnneSorswigtanAndLSLaon.rgIcuoaammgemu(un"naAbicSlaeLtte"o)w.pIiatrhctaiwcninoporaktteumneadfnfeearcsgtteiavrnsedlayonirdn the

~

2. Relief Requested:

ASL interpreter for coordinators. As an

work programs in order alternative, a transfer to

to understand a prison with

and communicate with other deaf inmates and

work managers and programs for the deaf.

Part B: Referred To:

- - - Food Svc
- - S:t;.~i:nb:t.s~ Office
· - Trust Fund/~aundry
- - Health Servi.ces
Safety

Onic ManagQr . Psyct!ology
R&ligiou~ Service~
CorrQCtional svcs ISM/Mail room/Record~

Part C: Informal Resolution Attempt

I.!:~ue Resolved/ R~li~f Granted

Com~DGmt.s;

Unicor Education RQc.reation Facilities J>.ctmi 1\i-lltr..tion

r~suQ Unresolved/
- - No Reliaf GrantQd

COltlllent:!l:

Orto~.blQ To Address

Co11111ents:

1$sue/Referred To:~

t). Ir:!!.l.lU Signature:~~\)
St~!f Signatuca;

~-

9 Diit.e> / - ~ () -

Date:

I

unit: ManagOJr' s Sl~:""t:u.r.. :

Date:

Coun$~lor'~ T~acking

Trac:l<ing J

E.:VQnt: O~t~

+ 20 Day3

Fo:rm I.5sued

BP-9 !.~3ued

flp.:.g Returned

EXHIBIT 26 174

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 176 of 372 Page ID #:179

Office of the Warden

United States Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Prisons United States Penitentiary Hazelton
Post Office Box 450 Sky View Drive Bruceton ~lls, West Virginia 26525 (304) 379-5000

August 31, 2009

Mr. Matthew Fitzwater, Attorney at Law 125 Broad Street
New York, New York 10004

RE: Bryant, David Register Number 06704-016

Dear Mr. Fitzwater:
This letter is in response to your letter dated July 24, 2009, regarding David Bryant, an inmate currently incarcerated at the United States Penitentiary (USP) Hazelton, Bruceton Mills, West Virginia. You have requested under Program Statement 1330.16, Administrative Remedy Program that inmate Bryant be given reasonable accommodation of having administrative remedy responses from any level, sent to your office via e-mail or facsimile. You state this will allow you to effectively communicate the content of any such response to inmate Bryant, and explain his further obligations under the Administrative Remedy Process in a timely matter.
Inmate Bryant arrived at USP Hazelton on August 8, 2005. Since then, he has developed a positive rapport with staff and has interacted with staff to resolve numerous issues. Due to inmate Bryant's disability, staff have maintained communication via written correspondence, which in the past appears to have been successful.
Inmate Bryant has complete access to the Administrative Remedy Program. The intent of the program is to informally resolve issues before a request for an Administrative Remedy is processed. In addition, it is inmate Bryant's responsibility to use the program in good faith and in an honest and straightforward manner. Additionally, in order to maintain the integrity of the Administrative Remedy program, it is inmate Bryant's responsibility to personally provide staff with the completed Administrative Remedy for processing. For that reason, the forms received from your office on August 18, 2009 are being returned to your office.

EXHIBIT 26 175

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 177 of 372 Page ID #:180 - -...,
Page 2 RE: Bryant, David
Register Number 06704-016 Due to security reasons, inmates do not have access to facsimile machines. However, to communicate via e-mail (TRULINCS) it is the inmates responsibility to obtain approval and assume all costs. Otherwise, Mr. Bryant can utilize the postal service and be responsible for the cost of all mailing to your office. Inmate Bryant also has access to a Telephone Device for the Deaf (TOO) at this institution. Additionally, we are currently awaiting a transfer which was submitted to the Designation and Sentence Computation Center for consideration of an Adjustment Purposes transfer on August 26, 2009. I trust that I have adequately addressed your concerns. If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact Richard Milton, Unit Manager at 304-379-5000.
2
EXHIBIT 26 176

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 178 of 372 Page ID #:181
EXHIBIT 27

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 179 of 372 Page ID #:182 U.S. Depart of Justice Federal Bureau of Prisons Mid-Atlantic Regional Office
302 Sentinel Drive. Suite 200 Annapolis Junction. MD 20701
October 8, 2009

Matthew Fitzwater 125 Broad Street New York, New York 10004

Dear Mr. Fitzwater,

RE: BRYANT, David Register Number: 06704-016

This is in response to your September 28, 2009, inquiry regarding David Bryant, an inmate formerly incarcerated at the United States Penitentiary in Bruceton Mills, West Virginia (USP Hazelton). In your letter you enclos~d a number of administrative remedy regional appeals on behalf of Mr. Bryant and requested the he receive an accommodation for filing administrative remedies. Specifically, you asked that all administrative remedy responses be sent directly to you via e-mail or facsimile. Gnderlying all of this is the concern that Mr. Bryant needs specific daily accommodations so that he can be informed of announcements and warnings, participate in prison activities, and communicate with inmates, staff and others.

We have learned that Mr. Bryant was redesignated and transferred from USP Hazelton on October 6, 2009. He is currently housed at the Federal Transfer Center in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, as a holdover en route to his destination institution. Security concerns preclude us from informing you of that institution while he is in transit, but he should arrive there in the very near future.

We provide this information for two purposes. First, we believe it renders moot any specific issues he had related to his incarceration at USP Hazelton. While the issues may arise at his new institution, he will need to address them with the staff at that location. In addition, we have determined that the administrative remedies you submitted should be rejected because they did not include an institution response or rejection and were not submitted

EXHIBIT 27 178

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 180 of 372 Page ID #:183

directly by Mr. Bryant. See 28 C.F.R. §§ 542.15(b) (1) and 542.16(a). we have returned them directly to Mr. Bryant. He may wish to pursue them at his designated insti·tution and appropriate regional office upon arrival.

I trust this response addresses your client. Should you have any questions or

concerns regarding your additional concerns,

please do not hesitate to contact me, or once Mr. Bryant arrives at

his newly designated appropriate.

institution,

the Warden or Regional

Director as

Sincerely,
c{)rrnui;_'tz_
K. M. White Regional Director

- 2-
EXHIBIT 27 179

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 181 of 372 Page ID #:184
EXHIBIT 28

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 182 of 372 Page ID #:185

Coleman prison on lockdown after fight - OrlandoSentinel.com

Pagel of l

orlandosentinel.com/news/local/1ake/lake-coleman-lockdown-I 01509,0,2305406.story
OrlandoSentinel.com
Coleman prison on lockdown after fight
Martin E. Comas
Sentinel Staff Writer
3:29PM EDT, October 15,2009
COLEMAN
One of two high security wings at Coleman Federal Correctional Complex was placed on lockdown this morning after an altercation between an inmate and a correctional officer, according to a prison spokeswoman. The FBI was called to investigate.
"Tt was an isolated incident," said Kathy Lane, a prison public information officer.
Lockdown means that the roughly 1,530 inmates housed at USP 1 are kept in their cells while officials conduct their investigation and interview those involved.
The Coleman Federal Correctional Complex, off County Road 470 in Sumter County, is the nation's ===:.=.:===-===-.:...:.::.:::=~=..:..:.::=.:....:== largest prison. Earlier this month, the same high-security wing was placed in lockdown after an altercation that injured two correctional officers.
Copyright© 2009, Orlandq__S~otinel

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/newsllocal/1ake/lake-coleman-lockdown-101509,0,4747... 10/16/2009 EXHIBIT 28 181

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 183 of 372 Page ID #:186
EXHIBIT 29

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 184 of 372 Page ID #:187

ti,S. l>EI'AKf-:I<IENT OF JUSTICE Fcdend Bureau nf Pri-sons

REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

LAS f~~M~:t.i.~~L~~~. [),~>z:o.cJ!b ~\NIT (j~~~ftT~~~~JI'?/fQr f.tp~ rJr U-\t! tuJ!f~point pen. Jf iJffitchmt>nU ,trt! needed. uJbmiJ jmJf' ropi~.f'- Mditronn.l instrucnous or1 revt'P\~+

i3y fV'Y PartA-iN:~tATEREQlJES'T~ )'/1'1 ,/e-.Y'/OU > ~J..ff/-

F-er:!..L;r.?-

::]:Nfde~{ Me.du:.. ftL/ (fl~W{;:~L J-/e.tJL-f h C:~ k

f+L/ 0 Vrry \J~~~'Y <:>fY'c>-"'1'? ~dtCYJfto.y, fl~.>e­
Dort'.f-Lt.{c_c_ M'fl-fG~ ~tc..-l<- ¥v-oM "';J~ 1 ;ye
J=L tA CAN~ fl<~;~ I- 1\te"<!:c:J FL-u.. ::::>her

'7tuf "?i..JS!r..{~ pL.u_ M"<J.rc.~f.1~1 ~r ') Lcl.f

ft.q_~~
C\..N.J

I NI!.<.C..J ;)t¥or<7 7~M) fh~l

LL:~-7

for {)Ov(r-.(

Y f } t Jhr...( ( L

0 4,

{2.,~?/'t-C-F

DAlE

?art 8- RESPOSSE

RC!JO NO!J 5 '09

IMTE

WARDEN OR REGIONAL DIRECTOR

If lli,ua(J.Sjlf"d with this rtspaiH«. yQu ma,- app,tU to tht RtgtOtUsi DincMr-" four ap(tt41111'fuJt It~ rul!ivt-diit fit~ /1f:Kit'JI'Itd Ojjkr lf'itkin :t0cai,-ndard4-ys c{!lt¥ t:kuf'! of rhiJ rnpo~tuT

ORIGINAL: R£1't!RN TO INMATf:

CASE NUMBER: ~Q~.jC:J'2J.::.E:L_.

!'art C- RECEII"'f

ctunt to:

LAST :VA.\IB, FIRSf. MIDDLE INITIAL

REG NO

CASE NUMBER: - - - - - - - - -

UNIT

lrlST!HiTION

!J3P lVN

EXHIBIT 29 183

BP·229JIJI c'\FA:tl 1152

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 185 of 372 Page ID #:188

U.S. nEPART'1ENT OF JUSTICE

RI<:QfJEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

Ttpe or ust' /;afl~-poutl pen. If attat:hmenfs rJN! nt/ed~d. 'iubnru four cnpit:s. Additional r'n,.,fnh~tfon,v on reven·e.
from:~£L??~~~~JNnN Q"~~.~c?/t, !!{NIT LL~f::!sn;l~~~;;'",y

7""h4r /J/Yl PartA-1;"-IMATEREQUF1;'T :;;:-

.J~r"Jou:>

/71'j

;C-et:..LI~ Tf'/fcfe'l

Py u:;e.. of f-e.IL.U(;;ol"/ -::>c-r, I .A( :£/'ft4~e)

· Ce..L~1 ~r-(~.5fe_c..i/te~LL( .4JJrc:>5 -t_he...

~ftfVL/J

1

L.-tflhtLt+y Of? c L
Dc.Vt.f..-r:.rYl/fJtrc&

or).erdvm-<~:c. _'f),{>horteJ

l t:Lt:v17o/{

y T h~"\I L D y
JZ~ ::> f'<:.c_t-

;/- J -.-L-7_ _
OAfE
!'art R- RK'iPQNSE

RCVO fJOV 5 '03

WARDEN OR REGIONAL DIRECTOR

----------------------------------------------~---------------

l'art c- REn:wr
Rew.rn to:
'>Uf!JECT

iU!G. NO

...----·- ~""""U... NIT

l;\15ifTliTlON

.......... ">~>~A·~~~-,

,,,.~-·,Y-

DAIE

UP-:!29{1:!) 4,-PR!l J'lta2

EXHIBIT 29 184

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 186 of 372 Page ID #:189
EXHIBIT 30

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 187 of 372 Page ID #:190

fcdcrd flurt:au -nf Prisons

REQUF~T FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

r~p~ or w;t! b.(t/l~pt,~t( pen. If {Jf{Ochn?t'tlH are H-e-~dt!d~ submit jour copies, Arldttionaf it!SlrUCtions Otl rt."'versc.

L~ ~~~M~tt.i.~I)L~~~ C>~~/(;_cJ16 mUNIT u~i~T~~~JP?n-~

F /"\?- i3 '( f ;ny Part A- iNMAn: Rr:QUF5T h/'1 ,/ e-;rI' a Ll > ~J.. ~

<f!!! ~:!.. Ll

J:Nfde:>T Medtc... f'IL/ (llc::.w.I-;:~L ;-/eoL-f h C:~ k

!1:_/-7

I"' f-i..L / 0 V cr·f \J e.. If''( <:>fYo.AI7 ~d rc»ft c:Jrf, yl~>e...
Dart'+- L \' l<-c_ M vt (C.~ '.7 ((.)(_ Rv-oM :;, w e

f [=L U.. CAN~ l<..?)~ I- f\le~J FL-ct ::>hot

I"" r '- f (_ ..r.: .,hrf "? us
M'<c:ircf4f.f<:>--f

~ t..A.
~r )Lc}_jJ

>~ "'<t t')-

N J t!:.'-C.. ;)1-Yor<?

c\..1\I.J 7~M:J fh~l

f for o-.-1 ·r-r

-r ;-/1 ~( (L Y0'1 rz-~?fu...

DATE
Part 8- RESPONSE

SlONAfURc Of Rfl)\JFS!ER

RCIJO NOU 5 '09

l)i\lE

WARDEN OR REGIONAL DIRECTOR

if dinatisfif"d wi!lt this rtSpolt.ta. you "Ul! app~ttl tD th.t Rl'(ionoi DirtctfW" four app;41 ~ust It~ r«ci~~d {n tlu HJ:KiMud Uff'ut" ....,.jtlrilllO calt:rtdi:irdafJ of du 4:JJ~ of thi1 utpcttu.

------- ORIGINAL: ---- RRTtJR:-1 ------ TO INMATE --------------------------- CASE ----- NUMBER:-~ -5-W-S--.2-t-.:-:--£-L-...-..

!'art C- RECEII''T

CASE NUMBER: - - - - - - - - -

ctunt ;:n:

LA~T :.lAME, FIRSf. "'111lDLF. INitiAL

U3P L\'N

1).' IE

IH'CIPIEN f'S StG,ATlJUE tST ... FF MEMRERo

EXHIBIT 30 186

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 188 of 372 Page ID #:191

.~EJECTION NOTICE - ADMINISTRATIVE: REME:DY

OAT£: NOVEMBER 6, 2~09

?ROM: ;~,o~k\rN'!(SYTlRA~T-NnE(:;~REt!L~, ~ ~ ~RDINATCR COLEMAN I OS?

TO

DAVID BRYANT, 06704-016

COL£1-'.AN I US!'
?.o. eox ro23

UNT: L/M

QTR: MJl-l08U

COLEMAN, "'L 33521

i:'OR THE Rl':ASONS LlS'!'ED SELOW, THIS ADMINISTRATIVE. RE:M£DY REQUEST IS BEING REJECTED A..'ID RETURNED TO YOU. YOU SHOULD INCLUDE A COl?Y 0f' THIS NOTICE WITH ANY E'UT',lR£ CORRESPONDF.NCE REGARDING THE REJECTION.

?SXEDY !D ;JATE RECEIVED
S:JBJECT 1 SUBJECT 2
INCIDENT RPT NO:

563559-Fl

ADMlNISTRAT!VE

NO'JEMBER S, 2009

PRZSC~XP'l.'IONS, XeDICA'l.'ION

REMEDY REQUEST

R.!':JE:CT REASON 1: YOU DID NOT ATTE:MPT INFORMAL RESOLUTION PRIOR TO SUBMISSION CE" ADMINISTAAT:VE REHEDY, OR YOU D!O NOT PROVIDE THE: NE:C£SSARY EVIDENCE OF i:'OOR ATTEMPT AT INFORHAL RESOLUTION.

EXHIBIT 30 187

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 189 of 372 Page ID #:192

U,S. llEPARTME1'iT 01' JUSTICE

REQtJI<:ST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

From:

~ '/

/.Ia

LAST ME. nRST, MIOOI.£ INITIAL

(1(,71f>'/-OI~ Ill

RF.<;. NO.

UNIT

Uu/-1 to(~/f'!Y
INSTITL'11UN

E_/lrJ PilrtA-INMATEREQUEsT .Je:Y'Jou:> ~h41- 111y jCediN; Tf'/fcre,-1
!7f U)e: of feLe.U(:>ol'/ ~c-r, 1 .r-f :Lt1fr1#-e 1

te:..L~1 0r-rc). Sfe._c.i//errt._Ly t+JJvc;>5 -t_hc:

~AfVLIJ

1

L-tflhtLt+y Of' c Lo
Dc..vtf-r-N1ft9trc&

5ecJ-c.. 'A.phorleJ
I!V,n&-}c_l

te.Lc.vJ7ol{

y 't hr"J "I/ L D y

JZ~ ::> f<::cr

Jl- J - ....s-.7_ _
fJAfE
Part R- RESPONSE

RCVO tiOV 5 '09

DATE

WARDEN OR REGIONAL DIRECTOR

1/Ji.lltt.thfin/ ~Nih thh rnpq~tt#, Jlbll l11#J'Df'p.Al JO 1ht Rlx/wu:U {)fndor. YfUU !¥'Pud MltSI M ('t'(:f!/owJ f.tt th- RIK'f~n.nl Offlc~ wilhilt 10 rtti~ltdtu dnyt n/ tk~ doJ~ tt/ lhis fY,f~f'-

OR!GINAL: RETURN TO INMATE

C,\Sf' Nl)MBER: .r.Sfu:;,3c;:'[J8- rj__,

-~------------------------------------------~-----------------

l'art C- RECEIPT

Return to:

LAST NAME. riRST. MIDDLE INITIAL

H:cG. NO.

'iUBJECT- - - - - - - - -------------------

INSTITCTlON

EXHIBIT 30 188

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 190 of 372 Page ID #:193

REJECTION NOTICE - ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY
DATE: NOVEMBER 6, 2009

WJr~RA~~RDINATOR FROM: COLEMAN I tJS?

~ '-'V'-

70

DAVID BRY~~T, 06704-016

COLEMAN I US?

UNT; LIM

Q'!R; N01-108U

?.0. BOX 1023

COL8MAN, PL 33S21

c'OR '.:'H£ REASONS L! STED BELOW, THIS AOMINISTRATIVS REMEDY HEQUEST r S B£:::NG RE.JECT£0 AND RETURNED TO YOU. YOU SHOOU) INCLUDE A COPY OF THIS NOTICE WITH ANY FUTURE CORRESPONDENCE: REGARDING THE ?.EJt:CTlON.

?.EMEDY ::o
::iATE RECEIVED
SUBJECT 1 soaJ<:CT 2 INCIDENT RPT NO:

S63':>58-F2

ADMINISTRATIVE

!10VE~8ER 5, 200:l

OTHE:R OPERA'l'lONS

REMEDY REQUEST

REJECT REASON 1: YOU DID NOT ATTEMPT INF!OR:."lAL RESOLUTION PRIOR TO SUBMISSION OF' ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY, OR YOU 0!0 NOT I?ROV!DE THE
m::CBSSAPY EV!!JENCE OF YOUR A'l'TE:MPT AT INFORMAL RE.SOLUTICN.

EXHIBIT 30 189

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 191 of 372 Page ID #:194
EXHIBIT 31

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 192 of 372 Page ID #:195
125 BROAD STREET NEW YORK, N.Y. 10004-2498
November 3, 2009
Via E-mail and U.S. Mail
Warden Scott A. Middlebrooks USP Coleman I U.S. Penitentiary P.O. Box 1023 Coleman, FL 33521 coa/publicinformation@bop.gov
Re: Request for Accommodation to Administrative Remedy Process for Inmate David Bryant, 06704-016
Dear Warden Middlebrooks:
Recently, David Bryant, Register Number 06704-016, was transferred to USP
Coleman I from USP Hazelton. As I am sure you are aware, Mr. Bryant is deaf. He
communicates in American Sign Language ("ASL") and, therefore, does not communicate effectively in written English and requires a teletypewriter ("TIY") to communicate via telephone. To our knowledge, USP Coleman I does not have any qualified ASL interpreter on staff or under contract nor is it equipped with a working TIY. Please do correct me if my information is incorrect.
I, in conjunction with two of my associates and the Washington Lawyers'
Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs, have been retained by Mr. Bryant to
enforce his rights under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, including, but not limited to, the rights of reasonable accommodation for his disability and effective
communication. Mr. Bryant sought similar accommodations at USP Hazelton and was
going through the administrative remedy process when he was transferred.
I request that as per your obligations under § 1Ob and the Rehabilitation Act and Program Statement ("PS'') 1330.16, Mr. Bryant be provided with access to a working ITY so that he may communicate with his family and his counsel and that he also be given the reasonable accommodation of having a copy of any communications from you or any other employee of the Bureau of Prisons to him also be sent to me, his counsel, via email or facsimile. Additionally, I request that a copy of the USP Coleman I's
EXHIBIT 31 191

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 193 of 372 Page ID #:196

Warden Middlebrooks
-2-
Institutional Supplement be sent to me. If these requests are met, we then will be able to effectively communicate with Mr. Bryant and enable him to utilize the administrative remedy process.
Alternatively, in addition to providing Mr. Bryant access to a working ITY, USP Coleman I could hire a qualified ASL interpreter to assist Mr. Bryant in reviewing any communications he receives from you or other employees of the Bureau of Prisonsincluding responses to his administrative remedies, understanding the relevant portion of PS 1330.16, and completing any subsequent forms he must submit-or to assist Mr. Bryant in communications related to any medical care or treatment he may require.
I am available by telephone, (212) 558-1632, email, fitzwaterm@sullcrom.com, or facsimile, (212) 291-9282, at any time to discuss the underlying issue of Mr. Bryant's need for effective communication and accommodations so that we may resolve these
lSSUeS.
Respectfully yours,
l~
Matthew S. Fitzwater

cc:

BOP Associate Gen. Counsel Paul W. Layer

Office of General Counsel

320 1st Street, NW

7th Floor

Washington, DC 20534

Lisa M. Sunderman, Regional Counsel Southeast Regional Office Federal Bureau of Prisons 3800 Camp CRK PK SW/BDG 2000 Atlanta, GA 30331

Jeff Campbell, Legal Counsel USP Coleman I U.S. Penitentiary P.O. Box 1023 Coleman, FL 33521 j4campbell@bop.gov

EXHIBIT 31 192

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 194 of 372 Page ID #:197
EXHIBIT 32

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 195 of 372 Page ID #:198

U.S. Department of Justice
Federal Bureau of Prisons

Federal Correctional Complex

November 10, 2009

P. 0 . Box 1023 Coleman. Floridil 33521-1023

Matthew S. Fitzwater, Esq. 125 Broad Street New York, N.Y. 10004-2498

Re: David Bryant Reg.No.06704-Q16

Dear Mr. Fitzwater:

TaBadbhrydoisaivtnieiost-nraine,nfyedroerueaspncroceoenqpdsuyeeionstofmt tthyaooeterue,IrncbsleeetiitvttpueertroicoovonifpdNSieedousvpwoepifmltehabmnaeyerTnc3Tto, Yrm2e0gmd0aeu9rvnd,iciincineagtowitorhhnaeicschacbdeyemsotswuinetrioseetqnaraunsteitAvsaeStffyLraoenimundrteecidrnlpiymerneatt,teerth. eIn process.

Although we do not presently services of an interpreter.

possess

a

TTY

device,

we

are

in

the

process

of

securing

the

In regard unable to

to your request for copies of all correspondence to be forwarded to copy third parties on all correspondence, as it would simply be too

you, we much of

administrative burden. However, inmates do have access to a copy may forward you any copies of correspondence he would like you to

machine have.

and

Mr.

are an Bryant

A copy of the Institution Supplement COC 1330.16A, Informal Resolution of Inmate

AwiiCmndiomlpldmaonitptriooetltaanmbnianetlatltysyao,casnicnfeoedaetpnekAtetaadhdtsmatseitifimnsaiittslpalitstnAraacndtetoimvitnfeirrnfoeoRimscrmetermaaiavntleeivrddoeeyusdRtoPisrelierudomctegitoelrysnadofmyriuso,frimcnldienoatgtthinesaedtfmtiielnJluimanmsgnptautctoeaeoudrm(tytbthe1hyr6eoftr,huof2oegm0rhmi0nth8h,mi,eshaiostuinewnemeiwntavcittetelheora.,shmetiThs)d.eh. efoItrims

counselor or other unit team member, the remedy will be rejected. It rejected remedy may ordinarily be resubmitted within an appropriate

is important time frame.

to

note

a

I trust this addresses your concerns. Please 352/689-7380 with any further concerns.

contact

Supervisory

Attorney

Jeff

Campbell

at

EXHIBIT 32 194

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 196 of 372 Page ID #:199
EXHIBIT 33

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 197 of 372 Page ID #:200

From:
To: Subject: Date:

Jeff Camobt:l! S)elfand, Andrew E Re: Inmate David Bryant (No. 06704-016) Thursday, December 10, 2009 3:25:19 PM

There's no telling what my schedule will be like tomorrow. If time permits, I'll try to drop by the visiting room tomorrow afternoon. Good luck.
>>> "Gelfand, Andrew E." <Gelfanda@sullcrom.com> 12/10/2009 1:56PM >>> Dear Mr. campbell,
My colleague, limothea Letson, and I will be visiting our client David Bryant (06704-016) at USP Coleman I tomorrow morning. If you are available tomorrow (in the early afternoon), we think it could be useful to discuss Mr. Bryant's situation as a deaf prisoner with you. I'll be reachable by email or on my cell phone (917) 596-5348, if you would like to try to set up a time to meet.
Thanks, Andrew
Andrew E. Gelfand 125 Broad St. New York, New York 10004 Tel: (212) 558-4097 Fax: (212) 291-9298

This e-mail is sent by a law firm and contains information that may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the e-mail and notify us immediately.
This message is intended for official use and may contain SENSITIVE information. If this message contains SENSITIVE information, it should be properly delivered, labeled, stored, and disposed of according to policy."

EXHIBIT 33 196

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 198 of 372 Page ID #:201
EXHIBIT 34

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 199 of 372 Page ID #:202

From:
To: Subject: Date:

Jssff CamPbell Gdfand, AndrevJ E, Re: Inmate David Bryant, Register No. 06704-016 Tuesday, January 12, 2010 2:41:38 PM

I will do my best to meet with you. Download the form from www.bop.gov, policy is "Administrative Remedy Procedures." I'll check on the progress on the machine.
>>>"Gelfand, Andrew E." <Gelfanda@sullcrom.com> 1/12/2010 11:33 AM >>> Dear Mr. Campbell,
I write on behalf of inmate David Bryant, Register Number 06704-016, who is deaf and communicates in American Sign Language ("ASL"). Mr. Bryant requires assistance to communicate with prison staff and participate in the prison grievance process because ASL is a language with a complex grammatical structure and without a one-to-one correspondence with English. On November 30, 2009, my colleague Matt Fitzwater wrote to you about: (1) whether USP Coleman I is in the process of either obtaining a working TTY machine or hiring a qualified ASL interpreter to accommodate Mr. Bryant's communication needs; and (2) whether USP Coleman I would reconsider its denial of the reasonable accommodation of sending Matt a copy of any communication from prison officials to Mr. Bryant. I have attached a copy of Matt's Nov. 30 letter for your convenience. To date, we have not received a response.
My colleague, Timothea Letson, and I plan to visit Mr. Bryant at USP Coleman I on January 21, 2010. We'd appreciate it if you could respond to Matt's letter as soon as is reasonably possible. In addition, we request that the prison grant us the reasonable accommodation of sending us a copy of the prison's informal request for an administrative remedy form (BP-8).
When we visit the prison next week, we are available to meet with you to discuss these issues. Matt also is available at any time. You can reach him by telephone, (212) 558-1632, or email, fitzwaterm@sullcrom .com< mailto: fitzwaterm@lsullcrom .com>.
Regards, Andrew
Andrew E. Gelfand 125 Broad St. New York, New York 10004 Tel: (212) 558-4097 Fax: (212) 291-9298

This e-mail is sent by a law firm and contains information that may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the e-mail and notify us immediately.
This message is intended for official use and may contain SENSITIVE information. If this message contains SENSITIVE information, it should be properly delivered, labeled, stored, and disposed
EXHIBIT 34
198

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 200 of 372 Page ID #:203
of according to policy."
EXHIBIT 34 199

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 201 of 372 Page ID #:204
EXHIBIT 35

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 202 of 372 Page ID #:205

From: To: Subject: Date:

Gelfand. Andrew E. RE: Inmate David Bryant, Register No. 06704-016 Wednesday, January 20, 2010 9:28:02 AM

Unfortunately I learned yesterday that I will be undergoing dental surgery on that day and will be out. I will follow up on your issue, though. Thanks.
>>> "Gelfand, Andrew E." <Gelfanda@sullcrom.com> 1/19/2010 4:03PM >>> Mr. campbell,
My colleagues, Timothea Letson and Deborah Golden, and I plan to be at USP Coleman I at 9 am on Thursday to visit with Mr. Bryant. Is there a time that you would be available to meet that day?
Regards, Andrew
-----Original Message----From: Jeff campbell [mailto:j4campbe!l(a':bop.gov] Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 2:41 PM To: Gelfand, Andrew E. Subject: Re: Inmate David Bryant, Register No. 06704-016
I will do my best to meet with you. Download the form from www.bop.gov, policy is "Administrative Remedy Procedures." I'll check on the progress on the machine.
>>> "Gelfand, Andrew E." <Gelfanda@sullcrom.com> 1/12/2010 11:33 AM >>> Dear Mr. campbell,
I write on behalf of inmate David Bryant, Register Number 06704-016, who is deaf and communicates in American Sign Language ("ASL"). Mr. Bryant requires assistance to communicate with prison staff and participate in the prison grievance process because ASL is a language with a complex grammatical structure and without a one-to-one correspondence with English. On November 30, 2009, my colleague Matt Fitzwater wrote to you about: ( 1) whether USP Coleman I is in the process of either obtaining a working TIY machine or hiring a qualified ASL interpreter to accommodate Mr. Bryant's communication needs; and (2) whether USP Coleman I would reconsider its denial of the reasonable accommodation of sending Matt a copy of any communication from prison officials to Mr. Bryant. I have attached a copy of Matt's Nov. 30 letter for your convenience. To date, we have not received a response.
My colleague, Timothea Letson, and I plan to visit Mr. Bryant at USP Coleman I on January 21, 2010. We'd appreciate it if you could respond to Matt's letter as soon as is reasonably possible. In addition, we request that the prison grant us the reasonable accommodation of sending us a copy of the prison's informal request for an administrative
EXHIBIT 35
201

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 203 of 372 Page ID #:206
remedy form (BP-8). When we visit the prison next week, we are available to meet with you to discuss these issues. Matt also is available at any time. You can reach him by telephone, (212) 558-1632, or email, fitzwaterm@sullcrom.com <mailto; fitzwaterm(rusullcrom. com>. Regards, Andrew Andrew E. Gelfand 125 Broad St. New York, New York 10004 Tel: (212) 558-4097 Fax: (212) 291-9298
This e-mail is sent by a law firm and contains information that may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the e-mail and notify us immediately. This message is intended for official use and may contain SENSITIVE information. If this message contains SENSITIVE information, it should be properly delivered, labeled, stored, and disposed of according to policy."
This message is intended for official use and may contain SENSITIVE information. If this message contains SENSITIVE information, it should be properly delivered, labeled, stored, and disposed of according to policy."
EXHIBIT 35 202

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 204 of 372 Page ID #:207
EXHIBIT 36

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 205 of 372 Page ID #:208

INFORMAL RESOLUTION FORM

COC 1330.16.A January 16, 2008
Attachment A

NOTICE TO INMATE: Bureau of Prisons Program Statement 1330.13 requires shall first present an issue of concern informally to staff and staff shall infonnally a BP-9. A separate form must be used for each issue.

that except attempt to

as provided in 542.13(h) an inmate resolve the issue prior to submitting

• ••••••• • • •• • • •• •• • •• •••• •••• • •••• •••••• • ••• ••• • • ••• • ••••• ••

INSTRUCTIONS: Counselors will complete and attach this form to each Request for Administrative submitted, if not infonnally resolved.

David Bryant Inmate Name

06704-016 Register No.

QtrsJUnit

1.

Specific complaint (one 8 Yl" x II" continuation page may he attached):

I am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I cannot understand or communicate

effectively with people who do not know ASL. I am unable to participate effectively in the prison's work programs

because I am unable to understand or communicate with work managers and coordinators.

l ({~!JO~ ~\( ~\:0.(\1· 2.

What efforts have been made by the inmate to resolve the complaint infonnally? To whom has the inmate spoken?

l" '=tkq

3.

What action does the inmate wish to he taken to correct the issue?

ASL interpreter for work programs in order to understand and communicate with work managers and coordinators.

As an alternative, a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and programs for the deaf.

Correction~6ilmffbl

Staff Circle One:
~ot Informally Resolved

Distribution by Correctional Counselor.

I. If complaint is infonnally resolved. miuntain original on fole in the Unit.

2. If complaint processing.

is

!lQ!

infonnally

resolved,

attach

original

to

BP-9

Form

and

forward

to

Administrative

Remedy

Clerk

for

Date: Time: Counselor:

lnf. Resolution Form Issued to Inmate
1\ultc.
\00 0

lnf. Resolution Form Returned to Counselor

BP-9 Issued to Inmate

1\1..1 1_lo

13 S>ll ~--

BP-9 Returned to Counselor

BP-9 Delivered to Admin Remedy Clerk

NYI2528:416076.1

EXHIBIT 36 204

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 206 of 372 Page ID #:209

----------~~=~

COC !330.16.A January 16, 2008
Attachment A

INFORMAL RESOLUTION FORM

NOTICE TO INMATE: Bureau of Prisons Program Statement 1330.13 requires that except as provided in 542. 13{b) an inmate

·,

shall first present an issue of concern informally to staff and staff shall informally attempt to resolve the issue prior to submitting a BP-9. A separate form must be used for each issue.

j I
l

•••••••••••••• * •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

'

INSTRUCTIONS: Counselors will complete and attach this form to each Request for Administrative Remedy Fo submitted, if not informally resolved.

David Bryant
Inmate Name

06704-016
Register No.

QtrsJUnit

I.

Specific complaint (one 8 \11'' x II" continuation page may be attached):

I am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language("ASL"). I have difficulty understanding

spoken English. I am unable to understand and enjoy television because the closed-captioning is not turned on.

~

\.\

I b?uJL tNt% oo , 2.

C«fiQ\.UQ,(?t._~ c~ M~c ~ Q..cu11~lot What effons have been made by the inmate to resolve the complaint informally? To whom has the inmate spoken?

3.

What action does the inmate wish to be taken to correct the issue?

That closed-captioning be enabled on a prison television available to me. As an alternative, a transfer to a prison

with other deaf inmates and with programs for the deaf.

a1131:er's Review
~

Staff Circle One:
~Not lnformaUy Resolved

Distribution by Correctional Counselor:

1. If complaint is informally resolved, maintain original on file in the Unit. 2. If complaint is !l!l1 informally resolved, attach original to BP-9 Form and forward to Administrative Remedy Clerk for processing.

Date: Time: Counselor:

lnf. Resolution Form Issued to Inmate
\ \ '-" tr>
1 oo D
<(5':=::

lnf. Resolution
I Form Returned to
counror
I l., t b
!3tt'
:25

BP-9 Issued to Inmate

BP-9 Returned to Counselor

BP-9 Delivered to Admin Remedy Clerk

NY12528:416066.1

EXHIBIT 36
205

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 207 of 372 Page ID #:210

COC 1330.16.A January 16, 2008
AuachmentA

INFORMAL RESOLUTION FORM

NOTICE TO INMATE: Bureau of Prisons Program Statement 1330.13 requires shall first present an issue of concern informally to staff and staff shall informally a BP-9. A separate form must be used for each issue.

that except attempt to

as provided in 542.13(b) an inmate resolve the issue prior to submiuing

• ••• ••• • •• •• •• •• • •• • • • •••• •••• •• • ••• •••• •• • ••••• •• • ••• •••• ••

INSTRUCTIONS: Counselors will submitted. if not informally resolved.

complete

and

auach

this

form

to

each

Request

for

Administrative

Remed;mB:)·9) ~

David Bryant Inmate Name

06704-016 Register No.

QtrsJUnit

J_).., ""
Inmate Signature

I.

Specific complaint (one 8 'h'' x I 1" continuation page may be attached) :

I am a deaf inmate and am unable to use a standard telephone. I am unable to communicate with anyone outside the

prison, including my family and lawyers.

been made by the inmate to resolve the complaint informally? To whom has the inmate spoken?

3.

What action does the inmate wish to be taken to correct the issue?

J.- \uV) , ~ The~ pri~ son~ sho~ uld~ get~ a T~ IY~ ma~ chi~ ne o~ r a~ vid~ eo p~ hon~ e ~ ?.~ l\ -= 2..~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~. 11

10

Staff Cir e One: Date
Not ln!ormally Resolved

Distribution by Correctional Counselor:

1. If complaint is informally resolved, maintain original on file in the Unit.

2. If complaint processing.

is

!!.21

informally

resolved.

auach

original

to

BP-9

Form

and

forward

to

Administrative

Remedy

Clerk

for

Date: Time: Counselor:

lnf. Resolution Form Issued to Inmate
~\J.A~~D
~()O D
$=:::'

lnf. Resolution Form Returned to Counselor
I )z., j,D
=o:t:Sl.l2

BP-9lssued to Inmate

BP-9 Returned to Counselor

BP-9 Delivered to Admin Remedy Clerk

N¥12528:416049.1

EXHIBIT 36
206

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 208 of 372 Page ID #:211

INFORMAL RESOLUTION FORM

COC 1330.16.A January 16, 2008
Attachment A

NOTICE TO INMATE: Bureau of Prisons Program Statement 1330.13 requires shall first present an issue of concern informally to staff and staff shall informally a BP-9. A separate form must be used for each issue .

that except attempt to

as provided in 542.13(b) an inmate resolve the issue prior to submitting

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

INSTRUCTIONS: Counselors will complete and attach this form to each Request for Administrative Remedy F submitted, if not informally resolved.

David Bryant Inmate Name

06704-016 Register No.

QtrsJUnit

J.

Specific complaint (one 8 'h'' x II" continuation page may be attached):

I am a deaf inmate. Since I am deaf, I am unable to hear even loud noises. I am unable to hear the prison's alarms.

I miss important warnings and announcements.

2.

What efforts have been made by the inmate to resolve the complaint informally? To whom has the inmate spoken?

3.

What action does the inmate wish to be taken to correct the issue?

Strobe or vibrating alarms or a vibrating pager. As an alternative, a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and

with programs for the deaf.

G OIINN
Correction'tOtlmfi~k

Starr Circle One:
~

Not Informally Resolved

Distribution by Correctional Counselor.

I. If complaint is informally resolved, maintain original on file in the Unit.

2. If complaint processing.

is

!l!!1

informally

resolved,

attach

original

to

BP-9

Form

and

forward

to

Administrative

Remedy

Clerk

for

Inf. Resolution

lnf. Resolution

BP-91ssued

BP-9 Returned

BP-9 Delivered to

Form Issued to Inmate

Form Returned to Counselor

to Inmate

to Counselor

Admin Remedy Clerk

Date:

I ( 11\\D

, ll1 \1o

Time: Counselor:

~

NYI2528:416066.1

EXHIBIT 36
207

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 209 of 372 Page ID #:212

COC 1330.16.A January 16, 2008
Attachment A

INFORMAL RESOLUTION FORM

NOTICE TO INMATE: Bureau of Prisons Program Statement 1330. !3 requires that except as provided in 542.13(b) an inmate shall first present an issue of concern infonnally to staff and staff shall infonnally attempt to resolve the issue prior to submitting a BP-9. A separate form must be used for each issue.
••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
INSTRUCTIONS: Counselors wlll complete and attach this form to each Request for Administrative R " S J E : J-d9): O F subnutted. 1f not mfonnally resolved.

David Bryant Inmate Name

06704-016 Register No.

QtrsJUrut

Inmate Signature

I.

Specific complaint (one 8 W' x II" continuation page may be attached):

I am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I cannot understand or communicate

effectively with people who do not know ASL. I am unable to understand or communicate effectively with medical

staff and healthcare providers, including mental healthcare professionals and pharmacists.

2.

What efforts have been made by the inmate to resolve the complaint infonnally? To whom has the inmate spoken?

\ M..\\t ~w ,!\ '<.'l.kdt, lS>~ Our;.&. hL \o OOMP... \ b'(. \ ,d.._~..N't.\.\

3.

What action does the inmate wish to be taken to correct the issue?

ASL interpreter for communications with medical staff and healthcare providers, including mental healthcare

professionals and pharmacists. As an alternative, a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and programs for the

deaf.

Co

G. DUNN Correctional (etJNSlftJR

Statr Circle One:
~U~ y Resolve!

Not Informally Resolved

Distribution by Correctional Counselor:

I. If complaint is informally resolved, maintain original on file in the Unit.

2. If complaint is Dill infonnally resolved, attach original to BP-9 Form and forward to Administrative Remedy Clerk for processing.

Date: Time: Counselor:

lnf. Resolution Form Issued to Inmate
~ ILdto
)000
~

Inf. Resolution Form Returned to Counselor
~:ol \! ()
J]"t>O ~

BP-9lssued to Inmate

BP-9 Returned to Counselor

BP-9 Delivered to Admin Remedy Clerk

NY12528:416074.1

EXHIBIT 36
208

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 210 of 372 Page ID #:213

INFORMAL RESOLUTION FORM

COC 1330.16.A January 16, 2008
Attachment A

NOTICE TO INMATE: Bureau of Prisons Program Statement 1330.13 requires that e:~tcept as provided in 542.13(b) an inmate shall first present an issue of concern informally to staff and staff shall informally attempt to resolve the issue prior to sub mining a BP-9. A separate form must be used for each issue.
••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
INSTRUCTIONS: Counselors will complete and attach this form to each Request for Administrative Remedy F submined, if not informally resolved.

David Bryant Inmate Name

06704-016 Register No.

Qtrs./Unit

I.

Specific complaint (one 8 Yi' :1t II" continuation page may be attached) :

I am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I cannot understand or communicate

effectively with people who do not know ASL. I am unable to participate in the prison's education programs and

vocational programs because I cannot understand or communicate effectively with the instructors or other students.

\ N\lt. 1.-()\lb 2.

What

efforts have been made by the
~i\\l~

inmate

to

resolve the complaint informally? To whom
'fiwlclwi\Al ~.

has

the

inmate

spoken?

3.

What action does the inmate wish to be taken to correct the issue?

ASL interpreter for the education programs and vocational programs in order to understand and communicate

effectively with the instructors and other students. As an alternative, a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates

and programs for the deaf.

drmally ~ Staff Circle One:

Not Informally Resolved

Distribution by Correctional Counselor:

I. If complaint is informally resolved, maintain original on file in the Unit.

2. If complaint processing.

is

1!Q!

informally

resolved,

attach

original

to

BP-9

Form

and

forward

to

Administrative

Remedy

Clerk

for

Date: Time: Counselor:

Inf. Resolution Form issued to Inmate
l\ll hu
It<~ o
1S=::

lnf. Resolution Form Returned to Counselor
'~ 'L\ 1( 0
st1~Q

BP-9lssued to Inmate

BP-9 Returned to Counselor

BP-9 Delivered to Admin Remedy Clerk

NY12528:416070.1

EXHIBIT 36
209

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 211 of 372 Page ID #:214

COC 1330.16.A January 16, 2008
Attachment A

INFORMAL RESOLUTION FORM

NOTICE TO INMATE: Bureau of Prisons Program Statement 1330.13 requires that except as provided in 542. 13(b) an inmate

shall first present an issue of concern informally to staff a BP-9. A separate form must be used for each issue.

and

staff

shall

informally

attempt

to

resolve

the

issue

prior

to

submitting

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

INSTRUCTIONS: Counselors will complete submitted, 1f not informally resolved.

and

attach

this

form

to

each

Request

for

Admimstrative "KJIF!oi)em-9)edy

David Bryant Inmate Name

06704-016 Register No.

Qtrs.IUmt

Inmate Signature

I.

Specific complaint (one 8 W' x II" continuation page may be attached) :

I am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I cannot understand or communicate

effectively with people who do not know ASL. I am unable to understand or communicate effectively with the

prison's

. Among other problems, this means that I cannot hear calls for line-up.

-2.

What efforts have been made by the inmate to resolve the complaint informa!Jy? To whom has the inmate spoken?

3.

What action does the inmate wish to be taken to corr~5\!!'e issue?

ASL interpreter for communications with the prison's ~and a vibrating pager for calls to line-up and other
routine announcements. That the prison's~ who knows ASL be assigned to my unit as much as possible. As

an alternative, a tra~sfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and programs for the deaf.

DUMM Correctional Counselio (OUHSUOR

G 3 Stafl Circle One:

Not InlormaUy Resolved

Distribution by Correctional Counselor:

I. If complaint is informally resolved, maintain original on tile in the Unit.

2. If complaint is !!.21: informally resolved. attach original to BP-9 Form and forward to Administrative Remedy Clerk for processing.

Date: Time: Counselor:

lnf. Resolution Form Issued to Inmate
dzt\P>
JOO 0
<S5'!=

lnf. Resolution Form Returned to
llz.., Counselor ~ /'t>
12.0 0
=z.c:

BP-9 Issued to Inmate

BP-9 Returned to Counselor

BP-9 Delivered to Admin Remedy Clerk

NYI 2528:41607LJ

EXHIBIT 36 210

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 212 of 372 Page ID #:215

COC 1330.16.A January 16, 2008
Attachment A

INFORMAL RESOLUTION FORM

NOTICE shall first

TO INMATE: Bureau of Prisons Program Statement 1330.13 requires present an issue of concern informally to staff and staff shall informally

that except attempt to

as provided in 542. \3(b) an inmate resolve the issue prior to submitting

a BP-9. A separate form must be used for each issue.

* •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

Sb\ 1...\ . INSTRUCfiONS: Counselors will
submitted, if not informally resolved.

complete

and

attach

this

form

to

each

Request

for

Adminislfative

Remcd:JFop ; y - 9 )

:

' {

David Bryant

06704-016

~

Inmate Name

Register No.

QtrsJUnit

Inmate Signature

I.

Specific complaint (one 8 W' x II" continuation page may be attached) :

'cAl-\i d? m I am a deaf inmate, who uses the assistance of a hearing aid. The prison, however, has failed to give me batteries

for my hearing aid. J'n,us ~( \ trhiJ t. oo\'} fQ. cR\\If&

<\f ~

\hlt:>C'C 'S\}L.

G. DUNN
Correctionai(OJmfiWR

Staff Circle One:
~Not Informally Resolved

Distribution by Correctional Counselor:

I. If complaint is informally resolved, maintain original on file in the Unil

2. If complaint processing.

is

!1Qi

informally

resolved,

attach

original

to

BP-9

Form

and

forward

to

Adminislfative

Remedy

Clerk

for

Date: Time: Counselor:

lnf. Resolution
Form Issued
\\z.., to Inmate\I b
I\:> 0 D ~-

Inf. Resolution Form Returned to Counselor
tl•::z.d1a )~oo
~

BP-91ssued to Inmate

BP-9 Returned to Counselor

BP-9 Delivered to Admin Remedy Clerk

NY 12528:416058.1

EXHIBIT 36 211

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 213 of 372 Page ID #:216
EXHIBIT 37

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 214 of 372 Page ID #:217

l'.S. DEPART:\tE:>T OF JlSllCE Fe-deral Bureau of Pri<-,on~

REQCEST FOR ADl\ti:'IIISTRATIVE REMEIJY

From: _____Bryant, David D.
L\ST NAME. FfRST, .'1-llODLE 11\1 riAL

06704-016
KH;,NO.

.JlSP_Coleman I_
!:>sirn;noN

Part A- INMATE REQLEST

., \ -'".,· ('\~\ < '~',LJ.:.. :~·""'

, "' .,..., .. ,J 1.\~\\\ J..._\'1.._ }•·• ,_J'-

\·,•..;·,"~'·'''·'' ~

,;__4<::_

'•'·

J:t'.'..Q:·<...:..\

)' ,\ (_~,'-~_!.·'·:"- \.. ·LL'\

.)

_)

':

( (J,,,·r:'t .> d.c.·}ON..J....

1 "\ :'..L".,., 1-,ui.J\•c ~-.."<- "-'~<kc_t\•,..c\, :",:•·'<'<· •(~'<'cy•c ,_,__\·o ,J_c i'C.t

L" ·~'..o!..- I"'''.\ v '.<bl~ tc 1-l ..,'t".c \"~\:e.

t'-- P' ?(C { \~cr:.,o,· h\

•''oi:J>,.., ·._., ·-·~'<...

'~(>;p.::;> \:,Q.••..\ ;_, ~ \ ),,,,_,_~·! ;\.U;'. n) cl.. ··~·.._; Xl.n_,( .::;:.( (~0•'·''-~·· tIc_):\:(. '·" '"'''

1.. I tA)()CI(_ i\Y)...<\j.~-·;,

· ,:..; (.1<.

. ,Jr.::· l i l , ((.'1..:;\_<jJI\M-o('_,. 1 U:_, }..0 ' "'• ,. (' ..'·• .

~ "·•"·"x... . "-;....~.·\•' " '-...

~.....,z..,,-::.'--"t

.

,

•.·) ~ ~

..V"-'-';J l-tc50':.1''\ un•t ('SHU'') N~, ~\•t:;:,L.._\J._ t \R... ~ 1<.\o.v_J.... tnr·,1 ·rtz. -·Ht..t, \ <:.'\\\\ \.•:Lt.--1:

l\;~ \)..t.. ;~\z \~ ~ \\ Cv,..\ '\;~ ~.:A);'(_ ,:~Ycil"~~\ ,1,..;r\;' \ 7~1...'-" k ~ (Y\ C1 >L(kcc"\'\"~-~'~ <:..~:XI\,Y\.V'\1 IU..K

\;:; \\:\, \,()c."<'t_ f\\ ).._t, Z~ <<, J.r-d... Cc..L..;o(, ,-;J...."V>< ', t_",.J'c'-''-+ \C-.. k'SL. '•\-\:<:'\\' Ltf:-.

2·~_;L .....c:;r<\..-~·A>.·•·c...:>.. -.,...:_ 1..'-"'"'.\' 1_;.~c<'\_ 11\-;z,.Y;;~.:<:c. .~xj.._ J
~. ·\:IN\:')~( \.1:, ;.. \)\I 'i:sU'- ·-·"" •TV. (j\:L :- c).!;../-.~

!'art B- RESPONSE

DAlE

W -'I.RDEN OR RFCJONAl. OIRECI UR

!fdintJtisfied with rhi.~ rnpon\·e, rou ma.Y appt'a/ UJ th' R~girmai Dirutor, t'our1tpf1etd muu he r-t•ar·~·ffi in 1he Regional O(fia ~tlhin 20 t:tr!~ndar day~ oj the datf' ofrhiv !J:..'>J!nnr.·t!.

OJH<;Jl'i \L: HETt HN TO 1:'-it\1.\TE

_ C.\SE NUMBER ~7~C'.2_-rl

Part C- RECEIPT
.. --------·-:---c-:c--
I.AST :-.1.\ME. HRST. '-HODI.F 1'-JITIAL

C.\Sl' NIIMHER. ··---·------·-----·--

I ~IT

Ii"STITUTH J'l

., I IF

EXHIBIT 37 213

Sf'

IC)

' '"i2

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 215 of 372 Page ID #:218

INFORMAL RESOLUTION FORM

COC 1330.16.A January 16, 2008
Attachment A

NOTICE TO INMATE: Bureau of Prisons Program Statement 1330.13 requires that except as provided in 542.13(b) an inmate shall first present an issue of concern informally to staff and staff shall informally attempt to resolve the issue prior to submitting a BP-9. A separate form must be used for each issue.
••• •• ••• •• •• •• ••• • • •• • ••• • ••• •• ••• ••• ••••••••• ••• •• • •• • • • •••
INSTRUCTIONS: Counselors will complete and attach this form to each Request for Administrative submitted, if not informally resolved.

David Bryant Inmate Name

06704-016 Register No.

QtrsJUnit

I.

Specific complaint (one 8 Y." x II" continuation page may be attached) :

I am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I cannot understand or communicate

effectively with people who do not know ASL. I am unable to participate effectively in the prison's work programs

because I am unable to understand or communicate with work managers and coordinators.

2.

What efforts have been made by the inmate to resolve the complaint informally? To whom has the inmate spoken?

l C~uD~ '±!a ~\Yf\1·I u.):{'l. '"

3.

What action does the inmate wish to be taken to correct the issue?

ASL interpreter for work programs in order to understand and communicate with work managers and coordinators.

As an alternative, a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and programs for the deaf.

Staff Circle One:
~Not Informally Resolved

Distribution by Correctional Counselor.

I. If complaint is informally resolved. miuntain original on file in the Unit

2. If complaint processing.

is

!lQ!

informally

resolved,

anach

original

to

BP-9

Form

and

forward

to

Administrative

Remedy

Clerk

for

lnf. Resolution

lnf. Resolution

BP-91ssued

BP-9 Returned

BP-9 Delivered to

Form Issued

Form Returned to

to Inmate

to Inmate

Counselor

Date:

l\z...t)tC:>

1~1.1\1o

to Counselor

Admin Remedy Clerk

Time: Counselor.

lQO 0
=:o=-

I ~~c
%-

NYJ2528:416076.1

EXHIBIT 37 214

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 216 of 372 Page ID #:219

L.S. DEP \RT\tENT OF Jt.:S liCE I nkt ai Bureau •lf Pn\lH1S

REQUEST FOR Af):\IINISTRATIVE REMEOY

From: ---~Bryant, David D.
L\ST :-;AME. FIRST. MIDHLE INITIAL
l'art A- 11'.""\IATE REQUEST

06704-016
RE(;. -..:o.

USP Coleman I
1:"\STITLTION

I
;\,_ c.·1-...k .;_-\

,i,;J.,\\o.•~I!.\,Z,-, to ·]'•'- '''"- ·u:<"\i;<?,-.e ·• \tx ;'''-! •'ol\i'''\' ·'- 1)_,_"..,:' t',( \',,:..,.<.._ Cl',i'/

• <. :..;. •..,.;-'-')~ f.J'::'--t\<:•'<··, .·_,·•.:-\-\z ~,_,_,-.3"\ ·~1/..(_

· +~..., ,.,cJ.c ''-"''""·'- 'T• \""'- ,._;,., •:J~"\(9<.tl•; .._,,~,_,<.

\).'.._"t\-<?·1<">

'''"""''-

'· >\ 2-1:\1:'·-.....·-t\'"··'"··:\

c'~
·. .

x·.'-'), ".."I

·._.x.,,r;c;\'*\s (,xc..L.,·....:..tt;x_

l);q~,,v·:,,).!..::··c":"' \:<.:~~:-

\\,_J J \ 1,,1 +~\ J-.t \I):~:,

) I;:,·" \i'iLu.<\ip.~·-\i~..A.:t ~""- \X'"><'i-\. \'vl ,r.v_u;~n<>:w·, \1:':< 1\',L
~·.r-- },:;:, \\,Z,:~~1 \':)Ao\·~· '\\·.f.L. \:,>'-."\:\<:'t'•J \\<(;:.( p-., \;..<... -~XC..i.fx._

Part B- RESPO!'\SE

RCIJD FEB !Q ·~(J

!>,\IE

- - - - - - -w--\-KI-JfN. ,OR- R-EG-I-ON-.~-! -IJ·IR'H"T'O'R' ' - - - - - -

.. - IF di\,ullr{h·d k'rth thi,· rt'.'>pml'l~, rou ma-r appt>al to ihe Rel(ional /Jirector. Your flt}rral mu\t hl' rruil't'd in thf' Regi-<tnlll IJjfit·e. "'.ilhin 20 calentliJr dav.<~ ~~l fh~ date 'tf.'1~· rn.EJluse.

OHI(;I'\1.\L: RETCR:'Ii ro JN\1\IT

CASP '<UMBI'R: C;] 5_(£:'-+.t..t- r \

!'art C- RECEIPT

n r ~~-------

!',~TIT!:

,,'!

;·-;P JN

-

-

-

-

-

-:n·r-

-----
! P i f -..' H ' ' i

-·-·-
\IVo.

'.

1·1

'Rl.

'';I \l·F

\H· ~IBFR 1

EXHIBIT 37 215

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 217 of 372 Page ID #:220

COC 1330.16.A January 16. 2008
Attachment A

INFORMAL RESOLUTION FORM

.............................................................. NOTICE
shall first

TO INMATE: Bureau of Prisons Program Statement 1330.13 requires
present an issue of concern informally to staff and staff shall informally

that except attempt to

as provided in 542.13(b) an inmate
resolve the issue prior to submitting

a BP-9. A separate form must be used for each issue.

f) INSTRUCf!ONS: Counselors will complete and attach this form to each Request for Administrative Remedy Formp;j·9)

submitted. if not informally resolved.

: ',

David Bryant

067()4..()16

~M 4.

t{,Je-c/

Inmate Name

Register No.

Qtrs nit

Inmate Signature

I.

Specific complaint (one 8 W' x II" continuation page may be attached) :

I am a deaf inmate, who uses the assistance of a hearing aid. The prison. however, has failed to give me batteries
ror my hearing aid. "1"\\U$ -\A( \ 'n?N! f. oo\'1 n. c9 \\!'<s:l 'J:>"}j-\{, <"~ ~ fu

\hlD()Q S\1 L ·

(o:fS.

G. DIIHN
correctional61Jmnwa

Staff Circle One:
~Not Informally Resolved

Distribution by Correctional Counselor:

I. If complaint is informally resolved, maintain original on file in the Unit.

2. If complaint processing.

is

!!Q1

informally

resolved,

attach

original

to

BP-9

Form

and

forward

to

Administrative

Remedy

Clerk

for

Date: Time: Counselor:

lnf. Resolution
Form Issued
to Inmate
~~~\ ~~ b
I~OD
~

Inf. Resolution
Form Returned to
Counselor
l\:2d1o
)~oo
~

BP-9lssued to Inmate

BP-9 Returned to Counselor

BP-9 Delivered to Admin Remedy Clerk

NY12528:416058.1

EXHIBIT 37 216

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 218 of 372 Page ID #:221

l'.S. OEP.\Rn!E~T OF JtSTICR h:dt:r,..d Bur~au 1Jf Pnson~
From: ---"""B"'r=-'-y-'a::.:n'-'-"t"-''--"'0'-'a""v-'-"i=-'d"'---=D,_,_.____
L\ST '1.\ ..IE. HRST, :\IID£JLE INITIAL
l'art A- IN.\1ATE REQUEST
7~''

REQl'EST fOR Af>MINISTRATIVE RE\1EDY

06704-016
RFC. NO.

_!1_S_I>_ Coleman_ur_
INSTIT\IllON

2- i-(-/C!
:JAfE
!'art 8- RESPONSE

\IGNAf'

!>.\ TF

W.\f<DE'I ()f< REGiiY'-1·\L lliRECTOR

If diualll{ied with thi> mpan,e, ·'"" mav appeal ro rile /(e~ronal Hirccror, hmr appeal mtHt he m·ei>..d in tlu He!(Wllai llffirc wrthitt ]II calendar da~s of the dnr~ af thi> n·~mr

ORH;JN \L: flETl'RN TO JNMA n:

C\S~. ;-.;uMBER .~1~· j3_{£_fl._

Part C- RECEIPT

'XHJEC

·----~--

-·------~-··--

1 \',f 'iA\H:. IIR'iT \11DLll.f INITIAL

---------·----

!ZU ll'lb'\J'S \11;'<\1\I<E ·\I \rl- \lc\lliH<>

EXHIBIT 37 217

t:-:STITLTJON
IJ
1'10~

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 219 of 372 Page ID #:222

COC 1330.16.A January 16, 2008
Attachment A

INFORMAL RESOLUTION FORM

NOTICE TO INMATE: Bureau of Prisons Program Statement 1330.13 requires that except as provided in 542.13(b) an inmate shall first present an issue of concern informally to staff and staff shall informally attempt to resolve the issue prior to submiuing a BP-9. A separate form must be used for each issue.
••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

INSTRUCTIONS: Counselors wtll subnutted. tf not mformally resolved.

complete

and

attach

this

form

to

each

Request

for

Admimslrat!ve

R ' S J / I _-9J) j ) F

David Bryant Inmate Name

06704-016 Register No.

QtrsJUmt

Inmate Signature

I.

Specific complaint (one 8 W' x II" continuation page may be attached):

I am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I cannot understand or communicate

effectively with people who do not know ASL. I am unable to understand or communicate effectively with medical

staff and healthcare providers, including mental healthcare professionals and pharmacists.

2.

What efforts have been made by the inmate to resolve the complaint informally? To whom has the inmate spoken?

\ 'r\)...\X ~.t!!NN '"'(,~ t.A:>% 0\ID...Q l\t.\oooa.oh. , b'(. =r,~wit.\\

3.

What action does the inmate wish to be taken to correct the issue?

ASL interpreter for communications with medical staff and healthcare providers, including mental healthcare

professionals and pharmacists. As an alternative, a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and programs for the

deaf.

Co

G. DUNN Correctional (OOJfSfroR

Statr Circle One:
~ll ~ y Resolve!

Not Informally Resolved

Distribution by Correctional Counselor:

1. If complaint is informally resolved. maintain original on file in the Unit.

2. If complaint processing.

is

!!ill

informally

resolved.

attach

original

to

BP-9

Form

and

forward

to

Administrative

Remedy

Clerk

for

Date: Time: Counselor:

lnf. Resolution Form Issued to Inmate
1j).;d1o
jOOO
~

lnf. Resolution Form Returned to Counselor
ll:zd! ()
l]"f>l>
<;<::

BP-91ssued to Inmate

BP-9 Returned to Counselor

BP-9 Delivered to Admin Remedy Clerk

NYI2528:416074.1

EXHIBIT 37 218

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 220 of 372 Page ID #:223

L.S. IJFPARTME'<T OF flSTit E

REQVEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVF- RF:;\IEDY

From:

Bryant~vid_p_, _______
L\ST NAME. FII<~T. MHIDLE I"ITlc\L

Part A- INMATE REQl:EST

0 6 7 0 4 -:_Ql.fi__ --
RE<;. :-10.

(iNil

fiSP Coleman I_
I_,S'I1Tl 1Tl0N

\-;._ -,

, . \ "·'·I'.J...v'>\'-t: f ~ '-t-1, >! ·~.:_ ( 0 ~ ·y_v \ ~ \

' I\•

·

.>-.

~.',c.._'_,,,1 '\vi·--'- I-;, " •~-, •,.' .•.',. .\';,,•\\\

C\ \J\'.:.., .. -.~ (\~ ,_,-:,,tt·. ·-o,. ~ i~).;<t<Lj ;~( ·""') ;; i

- t<h·'~t<"''(- -\'b ··'- P'\5~,..::, ~..,,,,\\... :-:-\-l.r+J ds.: /_{. '•liY· ;..~.

Part 8- RESPONSE

(C\~ .. \· .UL· I1 V~

RCUD FEB 10 ·; O

!'art C- RE< Ell'T
L\ST N.-'.ME. FlR'iT MIDLlU· 1:--;ITI·\L
-------------

C \.Sc :"UMHER:
-- ----- -----

EXHIBIT 37 219

lNSTtTU fl< 1N

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 221 of 372 Page ID #:224

COC 1330.16.A January 16, 2008
Attachment A

INFORMAL RESOLUTION FORM

NOTICE TO INMATE: Bureau of Prisons Program Statement 1330.13 requires shall first present an issue of concern informally to staff and staff shall informally a BP-9. A separate form must be used for each issue.

!hat except attempt to

as provided in 542.13(b) an inmate resolve !he issue prior to submitting

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

INSTRUCTIONS: Counselors will complete submitted. if not informally resolved.

and

attach

this

form

to

each

Request

for

Administrative

Remedy

F

David Bryant Inmate Name

06704-016 Register No.

QtrsJUnit

1.

Specific complaint (one 8 W' x II" continuation page may be attached):

I am a deaf inmate. Since I am deaf, I am unable to hear even loud noises. I am unable to hear the prison's alarms.

I miss important warnings and announcements.

2.

What efforts have been made by the inmate to resolve !he complaint informally? To whom has the inmate spoken?

3.

What action does the inmate wish to be taken to correct !he issue?

Strobe or vibrating alarms or a vibrating pager. As an alternative, a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and
!he with programs for deaf.

Stall Circle One:
~~

Not Informally Resolved

Distribution by Correctional Counselor.

1. If complaint is informally resolved, maintain original on file in the Unit.

2. If complaint processing.

is

!l.Q1

informally

resolved.

attach

original

to

BP-9

Form

and

forward

to

Administrative

Remedy

Clerk

for

Date: Time: Counselor:

lnf. Resolution Form Issued to Inmate
t(u\\D
~

lnf. Resolution Form Returned to Counselor
, /l1\1o

BP-9 Issued to Inmate

BP-9 Returned to Counselor

BP-9 Delivered to Admin Remedy Clerk

NYI2528:4!6066.1

EXHIBIT 37
220

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 222 of 372 Page ID #:225

u.s. O£P.utTMII:.'<T or JUSTICII.
l"<>l<aol p..._ oll'ri«ml

REQUEST FOR ADMINISl'RATIVE REMEDY

r;:;, ,; """""/i>W' -bah~ p#n, lfaJIQCI.mmu are ,.,....,

cqt/<1, Addillo<W i~"" ""'""·

06704-016

~

USP Coleman I

~NO,

UNIT

!'art A- INMATE REQUFSf

1Am J,ru'--~ 1"""'1-.k ~ \ i!.tm"'""-"'\(,'3,;L \(\ ~~ .. Uf\ -s,~" t.~.n~~ l 'A'SL"1. \I\""

clJ~t.IJ,.,\1-J wro,r"~"'h -::,~'w'\ E:~'!l.k l""""' 1o <Ai\'"l.b\e,. v.~~..&, en:p-f

\e.~.t\o~t::f\ ~"""'~*"- d~ ~tl'\''6'~ rot"''W~on. ~.r 11'1~:1. ~vlf\1- <'N..f. ~~'\. ~ dc~<:.,'l.~'~ol\. \ ~. CJAn~ 'ot-,\~ ~\d... d\~ 'S\l«-'Al l-tuv..'>~i;­ \N't,\> ~'>.L. o0~::;\4q ,n.,"~ lu.(..~ ~ }..~< \ -tt'"..ot tc:, ~~"' Of\ clc"<kk..-

RCIJD FEB 10'10

JI.,.,...._, ••·-Oflkl-1ii-........,.of"*.7/i''rr 1:1~11!
~~~-,..,,.. . . . . . . . -

........j>fti .....

r-.,_j ....... ,_...s..

WAADI!N OJ< REGIONAl Oll~EC'l'i:>R

O!UGINAL RE'J'UilNTO!.NMATE

CAS!! NUMBI!R: 6/(;:,,3 -

-~------~--------------~~-~------------~---------------------~

CASE NUMBER:------

t.AST NAMI!, FJRST, M!DO!.E IN~

UNIT

tNSlTfUT!ON

EXHIBIT 37 221

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 223 of 372 Page ID #:226

COC 1330.16.A January 16, 2008
AllachmentA

INFORMAL RESOLUTION FORM

NOTICE TO INMATE: Bureau of Prisons Program Statement 1330.13 requires shall first present an issue of concern informally to staff and staff shall informally a BP-9. A separate form must be used for each issue.

that ellcept attempt to

as provided in 542.!3(b) an inmate resolve the issue prior to submitting

• • •• •••• •• • ••• • ••• • •• • •• •• ••••••• • •••••• ••• ••••• • •• • • •• ••• ••

INSTRUCTIONS: Counselors will complete submitted, if not informally resolved.

and

attach

this

form

to

each

Request

for

Administrative

Remedy

Fa

David Bryant Inmate Name

06704-016 Register No.

QtrsJUnit

I.

Specific complaint (one 8 'IJ'' x II" continuation page may be attached):

I am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I have difficulty understanding

I \J?MJL p:£::t 2.

What

effons have been made by the
ctf!\0\.U.(),(%.~

inmLaAte)to~resol~ ve the compfla'inOt i.nflorom~al(ly?

To

whom

has

the 'I

inmate spoken?
<!..<suf'l~IOI

3.

What action does the inmate wish to be taken to correct the issue?

That closed-captioning be enabled on a prison television available to me. As an alternative, a transfer to a prison

with other deaf inmates and with programs for the deaf.

G DUNM
anager's Review
~

Staff Circle One:
~Not lnformaUy Resolved

Distribution by Correctional COunselor:

I. If complaint is informally resolved, maintain original on file in the Unit.

2. If complaint processing.

is

!!21

informally

resolved,

attach

original

to

BP-9

Form

and

forward

to

Administrative

Remedy

Clerk

for

Date: Time: Counselor:

lnf. Resolution Form Issued to Inmate
\ \ '-\ \ 'b 1 OD b
-=6=:=

lnf. Resolution
I Form Returned to
counr'or
I 1., I b
1;tc
45

BP-91ssued to Inmate

BP-9 Returned to Counselor

BP-9 Delivered to Admin Remedy Clerk

NYI2528:416066.1

EXHIBIT 37
222

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 224 of 372 Page ID #:227

t '.S. OI<.I'AKTI\fF::"iT OF R 1STH'E

REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

From: - - - - -B-r-y-a-n-t,- -D-a-v-id- -D-. - - - - - I .\ST 'iA,\IE, ~IRST. MIDDLE IMTL\1. !'art A- lNMATE REQl'EST

06704-016
REG. :'\0.

LNIT

USP Coleman I
INSTITtiTlON

)~X\_y:--\~'""'-... --:. :k.~J_ "vt__;( -"'"_\v-. ..-.,........._;?,..._\ \)~t·\_)·.)·..;)_i~\ ...._) 'C.-R~C.:....'-··

I '

~

\c.\'l:·h, \:\-..P_ ,,,~2>~u.l ~-~ :::-' c-4.-<~ ~Ju."'-~.

tn< \-\.+'.>2.... (,,·.;'>0-'

r-::.L \ "''"" (t"-i'L<D ,':-'\-- fJ..,

""t<'(~h~"=-"

~

\.1""--- qdJ.u:._~f,(I\ \)t\":.''..Y.~:;

i-Jd...,

iGO..:-\tt<'-...1 pt''':,"·"~' ·,

1n

0 -q.J..:..

\:;

\.)

'

<.•f'J,(,r:)-u.·cJ

,x~J

('-'.Xl'O\N..(I\CI._\-(_ .;>_~.ct\v_k(

~ \:\-~ ~- 1\t-~fuctt<s

.A:.-, lJ '(,X C.:•\:l.v.c · ::,\:L~, ,+-)

.h·\

~"- ~~ \

(\ ).."\\\} (._ 1

I I <.~1'-<.0 y\:-

;:_ \li<<")\,: C \T) ;;_.

?<\~-,(y\. 1.-.} \~ 6~vf ('

tl~-·~\.- 1', i'"\';..:l;t' ··, 1 'IJ.-l \·'!l G~~ un' ~~ \;:-k ._;_~::<...~
>

~

(;
)

,£...._? ~ L!- I D ..J_=...J.._J !lATE

.r-J \ - .. /
~ ( ==C / --· "-7""""""?"""''-'--...." - - - - - - - - - - -
SI

Part B- RESPONSE

RCIJO FEB lO ·:;_o

''" rr.

WARDEN OR RE<i!ON:\f~ DIRECTOR

Ff di~·'tutiJfied Wlril thit rr;•,pome, vou ltW\! t1pp1'1li to the Rf'}?mnaJ OinYtvr. Fuur appeal mtut hr nn,h·ed ia the Rer:£onal O_ffiL't- within 10 caJ~ndartid}'~ ofth~ datt' ?ft!liS ""'~St'.

CASE NUMBER 57G3.?ll-cL

!'art C- RECEIPT

R~._'lllfTI fD

LA~ T '- AME. HRST..\.tiDDLL IN!Tfc\1.

RH> '.0

\lBJECl

---- ·----- ---------·- -"

CASE NUMA!-"R: _

\IN[T

I NST!TIJTION
--------·---

RLCI!'I!·Nl'S \l<ii>-\ITRF t'ii.~H \11:.\HlFIO

3P -:~::)(~ ~ i1 _:r·RIL 1-J_,,J

EXHIBIT 37
223

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 225 of 372 Page ID #:228

COC 1330.16.A January 16, 2008
Attachment A

INFORMAL RESOLUTION FORM

NOTICE TO INMATE: Bureau of Prisons Program Statement 1330.13 requires shall first present an issue of concern informally to staff and staff shall informally a BP-9. A separate form must be used for each issue.

that except attempt to

as provided in 542.13(b) an inmate resolve the issue prior to submitting

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

INSTRUCTIONS: Counselors will complete submitted, if not informally resolved.

and

attach

this

form

to

each

Request

for

Administrative

Remedy

F

David Bryant Inmate Name

06704-016 Register No.

Qtrs./Unit

1.

Specific complaint (one 8 W' x II" continuation page may be attached) :

I am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I cannot understand or communicate

effectively with people who do not know ASL. I am unable to participate in the prison's education programs and

vocational programs because I cannot understand or communicate effectively with the instructors or other students.

I N.."t UJ4 2.

What

efforts have been made by the
~i\,c.,~

inmate

to

resolve the complaint informally? To whom
t11w~AI ~'b..£4.

has

the

inmate

spoken?

3.

What action does the inmate wish to be taken to correct the issue?

ASL interpreter for the education programs and vocational programs in order to understand and communicate

effectively with the instructors and other students. As an alternative, a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates

and programs for the deaf.

Co

Staff Circle One:

~ d r m a l l y

Not Informally Resolved

Date

Distribution by Correctional Counselor:

1. If complaint is informally resolved, maintain original on file in the Unit.

2. If complaint processing.

is

!lQl

informally

resolved,

attach

original

to

BP-9

Form

and

forward

to

Administrative

Remedy

Clerk

for

Date: Time: Counselor:

lnf. Resolution Form Issued to Inmate
l\ 2.1 11!.:2
la~ o
55'

lnf. Resolution Form Returned to Counselor
'~ ~\ 1(0
s11:-c'O

BP-9 Issued to Inmate

BP-9 Returned to Counselor

BP-9 Delivered to Admin Remedy Clerk

NYl2528:416070.1

EXHIBIT 37 224

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 226 of 372 Page ID #:229

'"'I< "'"t 1 >~i It \.f i-''-'ho"- f'~ut ""';' .. "'
) \ < 1 '• '\ < .j.( 511 ~ I~• ..,\.~
REQlEST FOR .·H>MI~ISTR.\TIVE RE\IEI)Y

Part \- 1.'\:\IATE Rf:tJt'EST
r ;-. "~' ~, ~~~-- \;.

_Jt2...IOA. ::Ql.Q__ Hf:<;. '<0.

·t\.« r~,_., ·s U":";._ ,4~«'""1 y ft.._..- /'.r~l#/l,H'i, fi_'.•C. ,c<.L•~'->
l·u.~r,"-rt'<!..- ,.,.,.,"~ c~·'l-,~'r<, A.--•J r-c>~h.·L<_., t-.~ Gr
l ,.;.~ •A .fl'U?_ t .._ .·~t. k c.( ~~(J t..-J<'H.?l<- Cift.~ t ~ -:;;,Ji-!"'1:~ t~ 4-

----- USP Coleman I
---- '"- "T-r- n:- fl- o- l'<~~

Part 6- RE.'iPOKSE

RGVOF£810'10

------------------------------------- _G]v~_J_±:::..,.-1.-. nrw;t:-. n 1/•Ji\~tUitfitd .,·rth thil rt'\{#l~~i* Pill mav ltl1j~(Vi N thr R.·eittntd Hirt<"Mf" \!.: t!F R'\ ro 1'<\f 'fE

rm<T ?1(tpltt{ P'ttn.t br rf\'en-r·rl rrt tht' fif'J;i•JJWI tltfiu -~·ithiR .Zt! otlf'lf.df#.- J?yt :'fr,i}jt(.. .-if !hi• r~fiH.'.

C\ \I' :-,:l)MIHR

EXHIBIT 37
225

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 227 of 372 Page ID #:230

COC 1330.16.A January 16, 2008
Attachment A

INFORMAL RESOLUTION FORM

NOTICE TO INMATE: Bureau of Prisons Program Statement 1330.13 requires

shall first present an issue of concern informally to staff
a BP-9. A separate form must be used for each issue.

and

staff

shall

informally

that except attempt to

as provided in 542.13(b) an inmate resolve the issue prior to submitting

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

INSTRUCTIONS: Counselors will complete submitted, tf not informally resolved.

and

attach

this

form

to

each

Request

for

AdmimstrativeFFo.J/!iJe-9m) edy

David Bryant Inmate Name

06704-016
Reg~ster No.

Qtrs.!Umt

Inmate Stgnature

I.

Specific complaint (one 8 W' x I I" continuation page may be attached):

I am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I cannot understand or communicate

;iQi. effectively with people who do not know ASL. I am unable to understand or communicate effectively with the

prison's

Among other problems, this means that I cannot hear calls for line-up.

-2.

What efforts have been made by the inmate to resolve the complaint informally? To whom has the inmate spoken?

3.

What action does the inmate wish to be taken to co~~e issue?

ASL interpreter for communications with the prison's
routine announcements. That the prison's~ who

~and knows ASL

a vibrating pager for calls
be assigned to my unit as

to line-up and othe much as possible.

r As

an alternative, a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and programs for the deaf.

Correctional Counsel~ DUMM (OUHSUOR

StatT Circle One:
~

Not Informally Resolved

Distribution by Correctional Counselor:

I. If complaint is informally resolved, maintain original on file in the Unit.

2. If complaint processing.

is

not

informally

resolved,

attach

original

to

BP-9

Form

and

forward

to

Administrative

Remedy

Cleric

for

Date: Time: Counselor.

Jnf. Resolution Form Issued to Inmate
dz•\•\)
l OtJ C>
~

lnf. Resolution Form Returned to Counselor ~
112-t /1:>
12-.0 0
~

BP-9 Issued to Inmate

BP-9 Returned to Counselor

BP-9 Delivered to Admin Remedy Clerk

NY 12528:416071.1

EXHIBIT 37
226

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 228 of 372 Page ID #:231

:>. OEPMU"MEN'I OF JU\11( 1-: I :,d._'nl Har~au nl Prt-.,.:HL"

HEQtJEST FOR Af)MINISTRATlVE KF\WUY

!"art A- !:\MATE REQUEST
::,.N\ ;... ,.li!_A+
;1,;1...)
f/ISC-, l-,A",

-- Q.§.l04-0l§
~~~:(;. "10.

.b (. o rV> Lc- .} :It: :...

i""-.

( O[VI'Vtv 11 C 4. ~
v1c1 lr ;_)~ ·"-

w .4-t ~
Tr1

l/ {-1.-'t 0 '\.(_..
i·1..C: !vJ.•--.?

'1 r1-1,.

fr''>" '1
~1. ,.{

~c --\\. \LL..,.#._

~-e_.c,.e,,.,.-,..c;.'

tL1-../.J!.-"'>f< ....,')

~Jl ,,fr/L r-k ITj

-{o C." ""' ~c. t-

.z- L/-;c DATe Part 8- RE..<;I'ONSI£

Jl.~ leJJl_<Lr"L...L
1:-<STIT\.'TII>N

RCUOFEB 10'10

!'art C- RECEIPT
"flJLCr

I: NIT
EXHIBIT 37
227

~P--?,~'jl 1 ;;
·\PHit 1 >Ji;?

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 229 of 372 Page ID #:232

COC 1330.16.A 1anuary 16, 2008
Attachment A

INFORMAL RESOLUTION FORM

NOTICE TO INMATE: Bureau of Prisons Program Statement 1330.13 requires shall first present an issue of concern informally to staff and staff shall informally a BP-9. A separate form must be used for each issue.

that el(cept attempt to

as provided in 542.13(b) an inmate resolve the issue prior to submitting

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
INSTRUCTIONS: Counselors will complete and submitted. if not informally resolved.

••••••
attach this

•••
form

••
to

•••
each

R•e•q•ue•st•f•or•A•d•m•in•is•tr•at•iv•e•R•e• rne~yB

~

:

J

·

9

)

David Bryant Inmate Name

06704-016 Register No.

QtrsJUnit

J_)..,
'7tn"'ma;_te_S;::i-'gn""'a-tu-re-

I.

Specific complaint (one 8 ~.. " II" continuation page may be attached):

I am a deaf inmate and am unable to use a standard telephone. l am unable to communicate with anyone outside the

prison, including my family and lawyers.

been made by the inmate to resolve the complaint informally? To whom has the inmate spoken?
N\

¥ecs.

3.

What action does the inmate wish to be taken to correct the issue?

J.. The prison should get a TIY machine or a video phone 'ZJ\.

2 \.\u~

<.R...

Correctional Counselor's Comments (including actual steps taken to resolve):
i~s?£~!~ yr;s:±Ji!LZJ!l ro

Date Not Informally Resolved

Distribution by Correctional Counselor:

I. If complaint is informally resolved, maintain original on file in the Unit.

2. If complaint processing.

is

I!Q1

informally

resolved.

attach

original

to

BP-9

Form

and

forward

to

Administrative

Remedy

Clerk

for

Date: Time: Counselor:

lnf. Resolution
Form Issued
to Inmate
~\~~UD
~OOD
£&:-

lnf. Resolution Form Returned to Counselor
I ) l-1 !1 D
13z:!O
=o=

BP-9 Issued to Inmate

BP-9 Returned to Counselor

BP-9 Delivered to Admin Remedy Clerk

NYI2528:416049.1

EXHIBIT 37
228

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 230 of 372 Page ID #:233
EXHIBIT 38

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 231 of 372 Page ID #:234

{'.S. D~:I'ART!\IE:'-IT OF .Jl:STJCR Federal tiureau t)f Pri~mb

REQCEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

From: _______Bryant, . David D.
L.\ST NAME. FIRST ..'-llOUU: ll'l riAl.
Part.\- INMATE REQVEST

- __llfi] 0 4 - 0 16..___
RH>. "10.

.JLSP. Coleman I

c-.rr

I:'>.SIITLTION

,t,'f.l! ; ~ -~ I )' _\ \ L" _j
,)_;_. >\Lt \LXII~L..;; -~ '.oL

"'·'- l -\ .L ' \ j

~ -t\...Q.J<..., (:t.i~y, l ;~..,"" ( ~c..c.Ji.S\1t'.l; 'A'- k'::,L 1\\W\)'Q...\<o'\ \~ '(~'(_

)

f

.·j

~.:)_ ._J:."\'(\\~-J.J..;\.z.?,¥_ '-'-""<-\'-. L~c<\:.._ \i\')cY~-~-o':c, ~-xj__ ':::t.ce:>i_,,,,::h;;.<•.

7.... -\:lw,:--_,\<.c \1:, >- ~' '· ;':;<.::f'- 1..-0 ,'t'V' cA-L~~ r).J;.~-. '*' ,il \('~ "

.2_ -_c;- I C. nArE Part 8- RESPONSE

~-/'-"==:L..c:._.~;.c:--..---------...:....._------

Rf.UO FEB lO '10

DAlE

1/ dPnatisj1ed with thi,'O rnpon'<t!, )-'OU ma~y app~al to th~ Regional Dir~etor. t'our uppNzl muH h~ a'C'I!H'ni in the Ktt.tional Offr.c~ wtlhin :0 ~:alrndar.dayt of the dale ofthi'l !J:..'lf'MHt'.

OIHUN\L: 1-ti<:TI. !{;-;TO !:"!MATE

C.\SE NUMRER ~·71p-) :::{~2=--tl~

l'art C- RECEIPT

'-l-RJhlT

LA '>T ~,\~1E. f'!RST. ~tiODI.F I~ITIAL

CASE NUiviRER. -------------·-- ____ _

I NIT

INSTfTUTHJN

f>IIT

f(E!'IP)L;o.;T' ''' <f'..\ r URF,' r '' t-- \H "-IBFro

EXHIBIT 38
230

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 232 of 372 Page ID #:235

Response to Administrative Remedy Case Number: 576335-F1
This is in response to your request for Administrative Remedy receipted on ciFrneoemqmbuarmeutesaustrnytaiocn1ab0dte,ep2aer0osf1fsge0irgca.ntmiveYesdoluyfaonwar litilthnehetgesedrtapebfrafee,fct.seaprueoscreibfyiecoautlrlayunswseoferskrirgemndalatnonaggauenarosgtheaenyrdoiuncsoatoirteurdtuiionnnaatwbolrietsh.todYeoauf d5tyrcpIhneoo7eeevsur6anepr3dfreasoe4iactlnnssi4tnggsipo-odaeFonrtrn1eaietaoos,gqlvneayuoCibrooeftdarfoufsiaiscnttttemehgihanirasaNsgattyromaapcr.fneanaial5dqessgt7teufeeoea6.errrtn3shfrt4Ioteoeaf4rfvpryo-aweoppFrnauerh1aiolaessnatoilnhsrynietenohadrtusrnnueoitonneracuptsoufgtrtfsuorhie(tarnuCteyttectiohnasierouetfsmtlinyoeeoaedwhnapNnaispwottMvhsr.iooetiahs5drprta7ewrctynih6haaaoe3ftAru2e3nidr,n4iewpnmm2-srgFi0topiahns11cotie0se)acn.s.tdorsreueamIaYnrtnmmiteovtodhsuaeu.iCdpsnsReraihocs.esoagameutTrmialneNdhemgdeowysc.waafisitotherf,othr e ddAPPaicrasiycrssksooawrntfdirassoiy,nfmi,geSldSoythW,uwetti,hhtdhieBsaautthcseilaitdsosRinerfeegthgiss2ipiso0conl0rnoae0ssls,eepO,AdofytfnlaioacssuneetR,.amAE,atPGtynEe:aTopRrIpgTeeiIgaVaioEl3nb0aoy3lf3fDai1liin-pr6ger2eca2tvo6iBor,,uPw3s-8Ditfh0iIliRi0nn-gC1t.w0aIemftnoypotytuhC(er2ae0rBee)ukcreaaleunodaf r

dlebrooks, Warden

·~I, 1 ( L0 l\,
Date

EXHIBIT 38 231

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 233 of 372 Page ID #:236

t'.S. DEP\RT\IE:-IT OF .)l:STICF

RE(jl'EST FOR .\HMINISTRATIVE RE:'\IEDY

From:

Bryant, David D.
I.AST -.AME, ~lRS'T. :\IIDDI.E INITl.\L

!'art A- 1:"<.\fATE REQliEST

__Q6704-016
RF(;, ~0.

_ll_S.,£_ Co 1 eman.. I.
INSTITliTION

:z/ f\::11"_~ ~ ' I• · _J -.)1 l_ '~ 1 , '-~ --'\,.3- ;._

l. ')

- ' . ,\_\dJ.~.~_s"\·-v..(·.··JL (\ ,/_We·~,.,.~\\/ (C·"-l\f-t-l..l~ll~z...~1'- ,.~_: ··' \ 1 ~;;>,"-l 1,< ,_.,_, 1\Pil<•,(.l-k. '-\Vd''"''( ,~>II. •'f·'""-"'rd

,~y.- C"~,\.,_ ··;i:>.r¥

'>L ·. <.,••\ -~· .u..J· ; <'.1
-- .

\'/- 1\~U •~-• A

·t

\

!,(..\, t.~).\\~'().,t_ \)''-_v'>.Y-1.1\,

J. -." •; ~.'LI<.. ...,_j

.

.

·•·Q..\<-<.A''\f'Y\..1

u · ·(J1;-
·,r,l.('\--qz,\-1

·-c,t
~

;

c

,

·

H

_

,

\

~_,.
~n

.·• .,>liJ.!ri'!~•:::.--t~,
~ '

'''''·'''': :.:.r•c" 1 i•1 i...'I··H"'n :-:;; ·:,~x.:G~.'. t.n.:<_\\·,\\, ./-~ :\-Y :'1.'-e.(. ·tt> .\'::,L

h ·n l ··-.> \•' if. ·~ie..:.-1'- v<l. c.• ,Y; ·1

1'~'.1c.

\"t, c "'' ·•"-c''' '( :<+c •.(, "~h. l\-.ll.. ';,..>l.,. I Q _.\~.

J
\> • ~2 ·:.··o, " ..• v·,

A.::..L \1,.\(j pl.~( h_, \'-Q\Q ··'L (...":li\1~·· (.~ v....I-Dc, \<~1 :.\

:,,J... \~·'-;.::1;;(, ·.\""~. A~, --,..,,

Lj-/ C. "-·-··--
!'art 8- RESPONSE

\IU~.\ I

J/ U o::ttn{ .;tcti '- \..c /'tXI; :\' .

RCUO F~B 0 '}.0

1>\TF.

W \Rflf:~ <>R Rf-'(i[(J'-1-\[. lllRECf'OR

f( di,{any:(ini w.·ith thiy rc1.pomr:, •·ou mav appeal /I) tlw Rl:'f:ranal l!irutor. hmr appeal mrnt ht' rrah~'ti in thi' Rt';(toltai Of]if'f" -w.:tthitt 20 cait'ndnr da~·s of thl! dar~ (,f thi-; n'';Jl'ltht'

OIU(;Ir\ \L: HETl'R:'>i Til INM,\ n:

( ',\';1-. f',;UMBER ..SJ.~·_::)jG -=-f'_.l_

Part C- KlTEIJYf

J..:d1Jn1 to

---------1.\~f ~:,\\IE. f!R\T :\t!DUL[ INITIAL

\I 'HJECf

EXHIBIT 38
232

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 234 of 372 Page ID #:237
Response to Administrative Remedy Case Number: 576336-F1 dcYFToeeohmabuisfrmuriiesnauqmrninuyiacer1tasee0ttss,epto2aoe0nnfb1dfsee0ecp.atrtisoovYsgeoiygrluyoanumweardlisltrehefagoqnserutaitebnhfsfete,etcrsdfapopeurreaesAcfet.eidfiyrmcooaiurnllyibusestmreatertasdivinigcesnafRellaresrntmeagdefufdtaaoygnaedrenyhcooeetuhiapelattrehrdeicnasuortnneitaupbtrilooenvtiodweitrhs. 5tdyrcpIheno7oeeesvu6ranpre3drefaose4icatlnnss4itnggispo-odaeFonrrtn1aeieatoos,gqlvneayuoCiboroeftdaorfufsiaiscnttttmeehihganriaasNgsattyromaapcr.fneanaial5deqssgt7teufeeoae6.errntr3shfrI4toteaofe4rfvypro-awoepFprnuaer1haoilaessnatlionhsryetnienhoadrtrunsnueoiotnenruactposguftsrtuofhriea(trnuCteyttceithonsaieroeuftsmtilneyoeaoedwhnpaNnapwisottMvhrsi.ooteiahsd5rprta7ewrctihyn6haaaoe3ftAr2ue3nir,dn4iewpnmm2-srgFi0otpaihsn11cotie0e)sanc.s.dtorsreuemaIaYnrtnmetmoiovdtsuhaeu.CidpsnsReraihocs.seoagaemuTtrmialnNedhemgdeowycs.waafisiottherf,othre ddPPAaiarcsiycrssksooawrntfdirassoiy,fnmi,egSdSloythW,uwett,ihhtdhieBsaauttchseilaitdsosRinefreegthgiss2iipso0conl0rnoae0ssls,eepO,Adoftyfnlaioacssuneet,R.amA,EatPGtynEe:aTopRrIpgTeeiIgaVaiolE3nb0aoy3lf3fDai1liin-pr6egr2eca2tvo6iBor,,uPw3s-8iDtfh0iIliRi0nn-gC1t.w0aIemftnoyptoytuhC(er2ae0rBee)ukcreaaleundoaf r
ebrooks, Warden
EXHIBIT 38
233

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 235 of 372 Page ID #:238

I '.S. IJEPAKTI\tf:'iT OF Jl'STicJ<;

REQl~EST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

From: __ _

Br

yan-t,-

D-a-vi

d ·

-

D. --

-

·

-

-

-

-

-

.\ST 'iAME. FIRST, MlDOL.E ll'<ITL\1.

Part A- lNMATE REQllEST

06704-016
tu:G. 'iO.

USP Coleman I

UHT

IN STll1.1TlON

P\.__y-_\J-.,.....:·,~--:... }.• ·<.;.-( 'vc)< .,..._t-,r.,./'....?"\ \)"'"--'~;:"J)-'".;l ~~ '~L~'-"' .::._ \t__;·.-,<··c\--
\,:. \\~·, .Y..J(. ''"-:ot<\.<.l ~-~ ~ c-\·{,c.: ~...J.u.ct'>-c.

.!,.~~"" ' ..J2.... 1,: ,'•.>C>·· •

\

,,., (t-'iv;; ,~S II'- ,..\."':.L ,..~., ~lf" ~?

~

1 \. "'-

QdJ,u:...,:..:G<'x'\

\)tC''·f"""'...::i

)...JJ......

iGCJ.~c''·..\. P~''

Jcv 1.., u·Q.L..,. ~ '-'..rw'·/\;l..y,l

C.<.~xf\t!'""'C'\c<.~ <~~...ct\\,e_k( c.:, 1:{-h. +{.il_ "nt'11..Actt<s

A:. "}, ,.;. c.A~..:t( .::,\t~ '·,+-J ' '> '-..\ ::... \ ~( ( \ )..~\\\,' \(__ I I ( <.~1\...W )\- ;:_ "tli<':}\,: ~ ttl ~ ?{\~.,()'-\ 1...:) \'~ (:,~~;

il~.·~~ \II 1\\'~' ·~ )i J. p \o~.~ J((Y'; ~~::::('· ·~\,_JL c..,_~::z_~

L - Lj-/(;___
DATE
Part B- RESPONSE

RC'JD FEB 10 · JO

I J.l.fE

WAI{flEN OR RE(;TONAL D!RECTOR

Ff Ji>'.\'lliH{i~J wah thit rr\pt'ml!, ~~ou ma\! appt'ai to rhe f<f'J?wnal Oiu•t..·tor. Yourappeoi mu~'l he rect::n•ed iu th~ Rel(iunai (!/jlce wilhin 1.0 adendar d.ay.\' of the Jiaf.e ?filii~ r~'>~51!,

oRH;J:o.~AL: REn;RN ro 11"\t\TE

CASE NUMBER: Ej']fo 3.::'">l ~eeL

Part C- RECEIPT

!{._~turn ro

LA\T ""-MF" fiRST. \110DLE INIT[AL

:,LBJH'I

CASE NUMBI'R: _
I :--.J[T
- - - - · - - - - ---------~~·----

I -.P i_'JN

EXHIBIT 38 234

BP-??lll~ .~/ ~f-'ll 1 L 1~:.B?

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 236 of 372 Page ID #:239

Response to Administrative Remedy Case Number: 576337-F1
This is in response to your request for Administrative Remedy receipted on February 10, 2010. You allege because you use sign language you are unable to communicate effectively with staff, specifically education and vocational program staff. You request to be assigned an interpreter or be transferred to another institution with deaf inmates and programs for the deaf. Investigation of this matter reveals you currently have an Administrative Remedy pending regarding a request for an interpreter to assist you with communicating with correctional officers and other prison staff (Case No. 576334-F1 ). In this same case. you also request a transfer to another institution with deaf inmates and programs for the deaf and a vibrating pager for when announcement or wamings are made. The response to Case No. 576344-F1 is due to you on March 2, 2010. You should wait for the response to that case. If you are not satisfied with the response to Case No. 576344-Fi, you may file an appeal through the appropriate procedures. Accordingly, this case is closed as REPETITIVE of a previous filing. If you are dissatisfied with this response, you may appeal by filing a BP-DIR-10 to the Bureau of Prisons, Southeast Regional Office, Attn: Regional Director, 3800 Camp Creek Parkway, SW, Building 2000, Atlanta, Georgia 30331-6226, within twenty (20) calendar days from the date of this response.

Scott A. Middlebrooks, Warden ,,_)

;;./ il! ;,:_ p
Date

EXHIBIT 38 235

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 237 of 372 Page ID #:240

LS. OFPARTI\1£:-<T OF Jl STICE

REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE RK\IEDY

From: ______Bryant_, David_[)___,_______ _
LAST NAME. FIRST. Mlf)OLE INITL\L
Part A- INMATE REQUEST
.l-..l '1\

0 6 7 0 4 -Ql.fi____
REG. NO.

)lkt

IISP Cal.erna n I
J"iSTITI'TION

rex ·--<:-'." .:...:.. (' ; ·:.;;:'f '-'~ ; l , c· , "- iw. · :\1 '--+' +-\,_. }, ~ \:t.,_ ~· 'x::r<''-. , •• _~\;...\\ ·::,·\--(c;;\:.).,·'", ':< ''i _.\~.q_,J:,,\

_ ,.. . .-:_) \-J\ '.:-" \. ,-,,-, , C-<

"~-~

~~~-

I
i. cC;, tt '.

'')
--, ' . ,,v._n1,:. --.~.~.-:,

~

,';;_(_!. r\ ') .:;· l ),. \-\-.>\(\";'~~\.I

\ «-, ::\
- t-q,; •~j+,_.,(- 1c ·~ p~\5~ v~ t~ :;-+-~:( d.I.· ;J. !, , ir 2--

.'L

\ '(· :fl'-1-'',t ,) {'2~,

Part B- RESPONSE

-/~(

RCUD FEB J0 ·; O

of BTL<_· I·

---- ------------ -- -----------

ll\!T

EXHIBIT 38 236

INSTlTU rt< IN

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 238 of 372 Page ID #:241

Response to Administrative Remedy Case Number: 576338-F1
pTpiFmraheopgibsgoerrurrias.taamrinYnystor1wfueo0asr,aprt2lnsoh0ioenn1sgr0dese.e.qtaouYfB.eoyesuoctuaatorullresbeegeqeuytroebausentcasfaforeuerrsrAdeeeddyamoft,iounyiaasonrtureoartutehivnqeeaurbeiRnlseest tmttiootuehtbdieoeynaprrewrpociretvihsiidpoditnneegdaafwloaininrtmhmsaatavenisbdraamntidnisgs td5crpyIhneoo7eeevsru6narep3drefsaoe4icatlnnssi4tngigpso-odaeFonrtrn1aeiateoos,glqnveayouCibrooftedaofrufsiaiscnttttemehhgianirasaNsgattyromaapcr.fneanaial5dqessgt7teufeeoea6.errtnr3shfrI4ttoeeaof4rfvrypo-aeowpFprnauer1haiolasesantoilnhsryntieenhoadrtrsunnueoitonneraucptsofugtftrsourhie(atrnuCteyttecithonasieroeutfstmlinoyeeaodewhpnaNnapiwsottMvrhssi.oteiahsodp5rtaerr7ctiyhnhaa6woetf3Aau2ei3rr,dnenw4pmm2sir-in0toFpiahng1cotIise0esn)c.s.dtoasruemraIaYnertnmetioovdtmsuheu.CiapnssRdraihcoseesoaga.emutrmilanTeNdemgdhowyesc.waafiisottherf,othr e ddPPAaiarcsiycrssksooawrntfdirassoiy,nfmi,egSdlSoythW,uwetti,hhtdheiBsaautthcseilatidsosRinerfeegtghiss2iipso0conl0rnoae0ssls,eepO,Adofytfnlaioacssuneet,R.amAE,atPGtynEe:aTopRrIpgTeeiIgaVaiolE3nb0aoy3lf3fDai1liin-pr6egr2eca2tvo6iBor,,uPw3s-8iDtfh0iIliRi0nn-gC1t.w0aIemftnoyptoytuhC(er2ae0rBee)ukcreaaleundoaf r

brooks, Warden

Oat~

EXHIBIT 38 237

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 239 of 372 Page ID #:242
EXHIBIT 39

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 240 of 372 Page ID #:243
125 BROAD STREET NEW YORK, N.Y. 10004-2498

February 25, 2010

Via email and U.S. Mail

Warden Scott A. Middlebrooks USP Coleman I U.S. Penitentiary P.O. Box 1023 Coleman, FL 33521 coa/publicinformation@bop.gov

Re: Responses to Requests for Administrative Remedy Inmate David Bryant, 06704-016

Dear Warden Middlebrooks:

I am in receipt of your February 11,2010 Responses to Administrative

Remedy

for

Case

Numbers

576335-F1I,

576336-F1

2 ,

57337-F1

3

and

57338-F1 4

and

write

to clarify those Responses and the Administrative Remedy Appeals process.

In Request for Administrative Remedy Case Number 576335-Fl, Mr. Bryant requests an American Sign Language ("ASL") interpreter for work programs in order to understand and communicate with work managers and coordinators, or alternatively, a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and programs for the deaf

2

In Request for Administrative Remedy Case Number 576336-Fl, Mr. Bryant requests an ASL

interpreter to help him coiiliillllricate with medical staff and healthcare providers, including mental

healthcare professionals and pharmacists, or alternatively, a transfer to a prison with other deaf

inmates and programs for the deaf.

In Request for Administrative Remedy Case Number 576337-Fl, Mr. Bryant requests an ASL interpreter for education programs and vocational programs in order to understand and communicate effectively with the instructors and other students, or alternatively, a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and programs for the deaf.

EXHIBIT 39
239

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 241 of 372 Page ID #:244

Warden Middlebrooks -2-
As I understand it, you have consolidated the above referenced Requests for Administrative Remedy with Request for Administrative Remedy Case Number 576344-F1 and will respond to the consolidated Request for Administrative Remedy by March 2, 2010. At that time, if Mr. Bryant is unsatisfied with your Response, he may appeal the Response for the consolidated Administrative Remedy to the Bureau of Prisons' Southeast Regional Office. Any appeal of the consolidated Administrative Remedy will necessarily encompass Mr. Bryant's Requests for Administrative Remedy Case Numbers 576335-F1, 576336-Fl, 57337-F1 and 57338-Fl.
I am available by telephone, (212) 558-1632, email, fitzwaterm@sullcrom.com, or facsimile, (212) 291-9282, at any time to discuss the underlying issue ofMr. Bryant's need for effective communication and accommodations or to discuss the specific issues raised in this letter.
Respectfully yours,

cc:

Lisa M. Sunderman, Regional Counsel

Southeast Regional Office

Federal Bureau ofPrisons

3800 Camp Creek Parkway

Building 2000

Atlanta, GA 30331

Jeff Campbell, Legal Counsel USP Coleman I U.S. Penitentiary P.O. Box 1023 Coleman, FL 33521 j4campbell@bop.gov

4

In Request for Administrative Remedy Case Number 576337-Fl, Mr. Bryant requests the prison

to install strobes or vibrating alarms or provide him with a vibrating pager. Alternatively, Mr.

Bryant requests a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and programs for the deaf.

EXHIBIT 39
240

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 242 of 372 Page ID #:245
EXHIBIT 40

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 243 of 372 Page ID #:246

L.;... llEP\RT\IENT OF Jl:STICF;

REQUEST FOR AHMINISTRATlVE REMEDY

From: ____ Bry~ll.~J:)_avi~-- ~·----
L\ST '<M•IE. FIRST. :'>IIOilLE I'lll'L\1.
l'art A- 11\MATE REQUEST

06704-016
REG. :"0.

~~Z_\ 1\~J.1 \\(l..,(~t.~~;(--, tt~ ·j\,;(.- i~'.~ 'yjw\~··,\(1".., \r;<

l 2_ ;:_;_\,-J.;~;-- r)--:~--r-\< .. \Q ··~;l

~'~_z 1._.1.~\...-t,~ ... 1 t_tC

'J .''-"':\-<? •. v·" "(:«. "- c.'\:-tt' ·" ·+1;\:;:..:-\ c..;\~ x. ·.., <'·'-f I

u:-.rr

USP Coleman I
t:-.STITtT!ON
·~
i /'..,;_ ~~· •<£>'

,-v ~ "' •-:J:-\ 1e '· \-I'( ··.), f!,}..
1:,;-.w. '"·:. .:.u: cr \ -:l.:"'r

Part B- RESPONSE

A Clfu. c (u v~J. .Sk)(! J.S<'' J

RCUD FEB tO '10

!lA IE

W·\RD~:-.1 OR REGlUN..\1 DIRH TOR

J{di\\dltl/it>d wllh tlti\· rJ-'span\·e, ~·ou mar upp;~al to the Rel(hnwl lJirl!clar. Ymu appeal mttit M rtail·rd in ih~ Re..;iotw/ (Jffice wilhin 20 c.ulenJar da_·H ofthe.date. ttf,t7i•• n'.']!JJ.nse.

OHJ(;t'l \L: RETt:R:--i TO IN\1\IT

CASP :.<UMBFR· ~5_1,.,;;.'-}_~_El_

l'art C- RECEIPT

,[ Ill!'< T

l.-\'>T 'i·\~IL I IRST \11DDLI: !C.:Irl \I

EXHIBIT 40
242

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 244 of 372 Page ID #:247
,•
Response to Administrative Remedy Case No: 575644-F2 This is in response to your Request for Administrative Remedy received in this office on February 10,2010, in which you claim you have not received batteries for your hearing aids. You allege the batteries you have are not the right size tor your hearing aids. lrwestlgation into this matter revealed you received two pairs of size 13 hearing aids batteries as scheduled. According to manufacture specifications these type of batteries last six months with normal regular use. You will continue to have your batteries changed as scheduled by your medical provider. Your next scheduled batteries exchange is scheduled for Aprll10, 2010. Accordingly, this response is for Informational Purposes Only. !f you are dissatisfied wtth thrs response. you may appeal by filing a BP-10 to the BUREAU OF PRISONS, SOUTHEAST REGIONAL OFFICE, ATTN: REGIONAL DIRECTOR, 3800 Camp Creek Parkway, SW, Building 2000, Atlanta, GA 30331-6226, within 20 calendar days from the date of this response.
EXHIBIT 40 243

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 245 of 372 Page ID #:248
EXHIBIT 41

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 246 of 372 Page ID #:249
'lo( It ~It l i ,'Vi\-!!'- f',l!! ~pq, I nl '•'i\>,Jo<r'H lo, \"-'""
RF:QU::sT FOR .o\OMI:-.IISTRATIVE kE\IEIH'

Part ·\- IV\!AIT RE()CFSf
r ,, . , ;' :;t ._.'"' ~ ., " ~\c.

. U-.

+- A"'<'""'] • ~.- for,,l.,lt,>·i<,' .it;.."- ,«.L·~-.:.., ..r.. c: ...r\..,'\_ "".()

~'\_,('t__.r"""'-

,v-J "·'<- c...•I--'F,

..-.~~

t• ~...-~

G,,.. ~,_....,..,..,.__4..,.-'\ ~ (-.._,..,(

RCVO FEB 10 · to

t/ d}\nui~flcd 'lith ihi~ U\f"Hf\t>, !.'dU nwt> 't(7('f'tff M flu- N.·t:hnUJI NJrf<"!af
---------------------------------------- ---------_5-1-~~-~-3--t-f.-::-~--·---1--- II!<ICI:\ ;I.: HE f! l('i tO i';\1 \fF

l-'mo- tt,>Wffl{ fJW\f hr >f..:rnYd m tfr<f' R~.t;fmtdl O!firl ~'tthiN lfl t\df'ltdltr Jayt ;Jft:jift' •1/ !h;~ '~'Ht'
C\ 'iF ):l!Mfli' R

(.\SF "UMHi R - - - - - - · - .. __ _

EXHIBIT 41 245

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 247 of 372 Page ID #:250

li.S. DEPART:O.tE:>IT OF .JLSI'lCR

REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REJ\lEDY

From: ______ Bryant, David D.
L.\ST NAME. HRST, .'\IIODLE ll\IT!AL

06704-016
JU:G. '10.

(I'OJT

..USI'.. Co lernan I
I'.SITft;TION

Part A- INMATE REQCEST

~' l.:\\i\ J..~_)..:<.._¥...'.. '1, '1<-Z~\\\'\\...l\,\_1::._ ~;~lJY..._ ·~\

.A._,',<•C •, ·' .. • \

-'t

" ...

·,
-

·

. .J'

'-

1- . -;', ··.::_'_/'-.-'.' ',_":,':..'..._ \.. ·\oL' \

\ ('__ ;l. •',<'.(-' ·.,.

J.Ci. }V<."<..J..

'f tt, L c . :.c--:c... l,_J~: ~:_r_....,.\"'\t'vU~...J\ '<:

~~-·--~C' 't:"<\,~.(.. 1

~ · , .f: ~;-,-'.-·, \_.."C(_\'"<·~ 1..J-- \ • _J -

1.C\:" \L~ 'ct.'-' \ • ,

I ;.:. ,., u, 1 ...'...~1· 1...•_

',"__ _,

I · \'_·J.·,·.,..,,.....(.

tt.

_J,.-._.

,

<\"i:t'(!:•.,(:\\f 1>\ ~''--- (' ,"::.(-".~: ';; \.'~: ?<<: j~(,;f".5 \~Q.••.,L_-. -~ ~. ).f•'-~l•1),jj~ ~~ c~•';k;> Jsv... ,:":( (~,J(',"O..(.\'\ I\_.~:\:(. \,• 1.;,~~

'--"~0<·'-c \1"\'),•\;_'V,-·::, _;,_,0(_.
· JY~.Lr .::J f-tc'u)·,1"~ v ", t

,:1..1..~'\·::f:II\~\·J.
(' S. 1-i Lt ~\ J N·~,

luJ~-" ~.d
~~\ v:::,t_...._\U..).... t'

,U.~ ·.l~tl,

•.. 'LA ~ . .

b -.Cf-..L. ~\_.'-"-
~• '- \ ';;. .l~ ;-''.r,~"'' 1

1\:::_.l.c \).<... ;...S,\z. \~~\\cu....\ ~\_.,__ ,~'{_ ,'-":'>";;\'~:;'\'"";IT i J'-7'--'"" .:.+- ~(Y', c>

rt\v.,..,_.:l<<~H.\-:t:...uZ.-1:'

\

1.'1~
<:.-\\\\

~
VL'I_~.J..

-L\k?c-n""-\'( <:.~'''''.J-'•l11'.k

w 'c ll,J, \.),~0< fl\ ,l.J· ;,<;._.{, \ 'e> ).r-o/.._ i.:J.•C\ ,-J,_, n l.-\;<x '" '-"' ,..,.\. '-Cv--+ .1<', k'SL I •\\('c~\ qf':-_

J

~..X -~_,Q_,

(1.).)fi:>.\\'c, } l

J..•v-....

(

~~u-1.'~-nM_)i-.,

(

t)

):.':,L 1\\-\-f- \)'Q..\.o\

~

,;~'<._ ,.)\'-'~:2-.;·~,
-...._)

-~

,_-,

~(~l_ ,,_Cl\'f\\~--".. ''·C..':'·K '-"''"'"\,' \)~e:<\:._ \'i\':(\"~:"':c. .h:J.... t·:;C_,(JC)b,·,:rt~<... 1\<, ".<',

V' ' 7.._ ·1:\w,~~c \co ;..

·:::,Q'- u-",T'.- ' rA~ :- cJ,..i;.).. ~

2. .:_ cl - I C.
PAcfE
Part 8- RESPONSE

DArE

1/ dinatisfi~d with thi<o rnporHe, you may app~aJ to the Regional Dirufor. YountpprnJ rtiU\i he receu·rli in the l<(r:iorral Office .,..·ithin Jt)i:al~:ndar.day<o of the dale 1J_f rhif !><~pon<>t',

OHH;I:-1-\L: I{ETlRN TO INM.\TE

C\SE NUMAER: ~-7~:::-j::l_

P:1rt C~ RECEIPT

R..:turn ~~~

L.-'.~T N\ME. FIRST..\IIODLF INITIAL

\l RHclT·

CASE NIIII,JHER. -~------··--· .. - - - -

t'<IT

1:->S'IITUTI()N

EXHIBIT 41
246

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 248 of 372 Page ID #:251
REQU~ST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

From:

Bryant, David D.
L\ST 'iAME, HRST. MWOLF: IMTIAL

!'art A- li'<'MATE REQllEST

06704-016

LNIT

USP Coleman I
IN:-.Tin ITION

L~<....:.-t 'vl..J( }....\"\r~..,....._ 7"'-\ \),.~-.)-1_~,\'L''' ~~ \),..t'_.\:.~....._.'- ..

\ ·''"" nqL,jj ,"''-\-f.!·, ,A.':>L ··'""'' (3f-:~"

~
\t<

l.r"'- ed..Lu:..u..:f1~, fl''""f'""'-:i

;..JJ_

iC.:CJ.~e'-A..l pv'J"-·"~' -" ,., co.·q)_"'. -\0 ,_.~r\·j;-IJ.~..;.l' :.;0 uxi\Clv•"'('\c"-\-(_ .c_:~·t'-.v..k( c.:, t~:-k -l;l...,_ r<l':>fucttl,<:.

JJYJ C·~<lC

::,l;c~, ,+-:>.

A;_,

.'<\ ~:__\~\(•. :A.-:'0\JiL I (z-'1'-W y\:1

:L 't0<-:1~('

tZJ ~- ?{\~;:,()<-'. \,..) \~ c:,'\-t,>;

•llft.:'-\- \II \Wfl:t' '> ;,;~l \)l ~~~ ::c·,y~ {(,:( ·\-1~ _;._Z',.-z_~

2 I D ---~--Lj-

·~·--

DATE

Part B- RESPONSE

RCIJO FEB 10 '1 0

!JAil'

WAKDEN (JR RECIONAL DIRECTOR

!f din·ati1'{it'd wtrh thi'i revmnH:. +·ou rnav appetli to the Ri'f:Wnni Oirutor Your uppenl mtht he rt'et'il't>d in lht> Re1(£onal iNfice within 20 cal~ndo.r ddyr of the date vf this rt"fplJHf.

ORH;t:'-L\1.: RETl;RN TO 11'.\1\TE

CASE NUMBER 5]fo 331--=_CL

!'art C- RE<'EIPT

SIBJH'I

L,\~T '>AMF HRST. \l!ODLE IN!TfAL

D-\iT

Rf.G '.0

CASE NUMRER: __ - - - - - - - - - - - - -

! NIT

INSTITLTII lN

- ---------- -- ----------R!cCIPII·NI'S \(<,N-\I'I'HF rSIAH \1U.HlEIO

EXHIBIT 41
247

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 249 of 372 Page ID #:252

t.S. OEPARTME:-IT OF JlSTI( E f-\-deral Hureau nt Pr!s.ons

REQt:EST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

From:

_ Bryant~vid_Q.__, ______ _

0 6 7 0 4 -:1ll.fi.__ - -

L \ST NAME. FIRST. MIIIDLE INITL\L

REG. NO.

I 'ill

Part A- INMATE J{EQCE~T

USP Coleman I
I'\S'l1Tt 1 riON

'rex ·~," cJ"- ( ' 1- ·:J..,' ··,

\J\ · ,r,·J c':'<

'>._,.,~.~

1

\)1\5'~' \.'~l~·

0' -~:-\-.. }.., 1_ \<,,..,_

'Jb<-,

1<),;-::n '-~ ,'1( ~­

}-« ··, ·{ -":"t~f ~' ;{. i•liY

Part 8- RESPONSE /
'\o i'
--~.

!(CUD FEB 10 '10

------- -=---IJ.\ lT

I'art I._ RE< EII'T

Rt:turn (,,

.\ST NA\1E. FlfiST \1lUPLF 1'\!TI.\L

\l BHc<_'l

U \ !F
EXHIBIT 41
248

W \IUlEN OK KEGIOS.\L !JIKLCIOK

C \SE ><U!\lHER: t'>dT

lN~TITI 'Tf< 1N 'lP- :?9( 1 1)

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 250 of 372 Page ID #:253

I' S. DEP\RniF.NT OF Jt:STICF

REQFEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE RE\IEDY

From: ---~B"'r=...zv..:a:ocn~t:..L,____,D,_,a"'-"v"'"'i"'d"'--'D"--'-.____
LAST 'IAMK HRST. :'o.llllDI.E INITIAl.
!'art A- !.\'\fATE RE(.WEST

06704-016
RFC. SO.

l'SIT

___llSl)__ Coleman_-~
INSTITl!"llON

I J,'

'- -· /... }' "'"\:/.._

'·'<- 1 '

.

. .1'(jj;\'S\0l<,';...

1'(

L.~';( -~,,,'!-./

U' " ·-' ' ,\\ ((;,l'fic "'l"-''- •:

\1 ,)'" c\:v-.::l (j{ •• _,_,l'•t<\Ct•, """-· L\\'c',·i<v,

,,~ '~'·'·-l;J•( ;_I

\.)--< ,-
1 . ''
·~b-H;

1

;; l ~

"'_\·.C) ,;_u: ; ,.-t (_,,,_.I·•.M; ·.oL

.. •
.~\.-'-

.
'0-~}.

'
h~\(

. . .,1, L

_ \'

·•

\)\'•. v'•Yt..k(

\ ), y, •J
.

. U ,.
,· -

''t'~·

\' '·QJI."'-.},' '\f't\,;

v' CJ~,·-
cralV<>:.It

1~:; t-c:~··H_,,/.k

.,j__ )i\Jlr"!..J.:.I::,Y) 1

Lr.,..,.,,,..,,_"''''.i<TI('vl

i•\

;--'''H"'n

:-<; ·;.p:~,·u.,

\:.v.·)~\'ol\, .)..::t\~V :k( ·teo

A':-,L

\·~ ·.:;.1 \•' .z~·hv<.:'. ~.,,,;../ ~ t~'·.!L. \1, c::,•••'i'.t'l"( :ck_ ._.:,~\t-.. \\..JL";...J!._ \-o_..:.\+1,, \)<::~·.··31 ,

*·~-~ \•'..;>J:~~~~ l ·' '" r<~t~- t'y ~t> A~L '','~.\ ~-t.~Rr +-c~\~~~9 ~·~-C')t,\~~-,,~~ :~~~~ :~w"~.\
';\z.~J,;\. !<~ \''< !-\~'C/<11..._ V('~-..1 ,j,:.v .·0 , 1<\C \.~'-\'·"~ ,"0~, \'.o > !J\,_c ,_I 1... tLV uo ,7_,, ··V... I; ··

\ ' l .• I, .V( (\ :· \:'<-.\> Q.~ 1 l <}L l<' ) \--

L., '~-
. \.. '\ '"'-' '<.)"'-.;·

A-.. \0

.'· ()·1,...)..,..._,.,
· '\'' >'-' '-

~:.'"","t'"'

C.-1r.'v<c'; (J..L~\::

1<1\\'J.\~.', ·)

o,-<;}... \)•~·0...\'J..,"\l.C, \1f

•.

·>

~-'<-

2 ~c.:-;-;~"\_
:!ATE
!'art R- RESPONSE

J/ U o.t. nc.rvc{ ~.\c/~x~--n:f.

1>·\TF.

W,\RDEN <>R REGI!!N-\L IJIRECTOR

f( dir:<.:a{n{it'd .,,:ith thi~ rnponu. you mav appfai lo the Rt'l;ronaJ ltirurar, Fonr appeal mtgl ht' rf'ceil,ed in th~~ Rl'f:Wna/ Officr ..,·tthiu }{J caUnMr da~·· of tht' ~U.Jf~ of thi\· rr';JWttH'.

f )RH.IN \L: RETl'RN TO t:>;:\L\ IE

_-:_d_ 6-1 <'.\SE \,lIMBER .

t.t..·-:) j(c.

Part ( '- JU:CEIPT

RcftJrn to

I \'>f ':.·\\1E. IIR'iT \llDI.lLE INITIAl

\l BJECT

l''-i!T

l '\ STITl'TI< J'-i

1]· i':B~
EXHIBIT 41
249

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 251 of 372 Page ID #:254 '

Response to Administrative Remedy Case Number. 576334-F1

This is in response to your Request for Administrative Remedy receipted in this office on February 10, 2010, in which you request staff trained in American Sign Language (ASL) be assigned to your housing unit. In addition. you request to be provided with a vibrating pager to notify you of count time or a transfer to a facility housing hearing impaired inmates.

Investigation of this matter revealed at the present time, there are no provisions in

policy to provide hearing impaired inmates with pagers or ASL trained staff. However,

you are provided with a hearing aid and new batteries for the deVice as needed. While

you maintain a vibrating pager is necessary to notify
failed to be present or stand for count, as evidenced

you of count by your lack

time, you have never of disciplinary history

for failure to stand count:

In regard to your request for a transfer, hearing impaired inmates maintain the same care level as sight impaired inmates, and thus. are housed ln Care level1-2 facilities, as no specialiZed program is currently in place.

Accordingly, your request is Denied. If you are dissatisfied with this response, you may appeat by filing a BP-DIR~10 to the Bureau of Prisons, Southeast Regional Office, Attn: Regional Director. 3800 Camp Creek Parkway, SW. Building 2000, Atlanta, Georgia 30331-6226, within twenty (20} calender days from the date of this response.

Date

EXHIBIT 41
250

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 252 of 372 Page ID #:255

REQUEST FOR AOMINlSTRATIVE IH<\IHlY

From: _____....Jit:.yanj;._.__p_ay_id D.
L\ST N.\.'\-1£, FIRST. MIOOI.K l'IHIAL
Part A- I:'liMATE REQVI<:ST
T ""y' ;... ,i.t.J~.{: '" ,,,,.)e_ 6/\J
f"l.;i.vf
f/•'•<•4 l~~t:.

-· jt~}04 -016
~~~:G. "1(),
a..-., v··J•!:>IIC •f<> ,;:~

Jl~ ColeJ!l.£lJLL 1:-<STtn;TH)N
(L ·'> r;_,c{C</,J.

lvt cf o "(.. ,:.) '-' f S 1e.tc__ ·+\ ,.t_ f' n S I' '1

1·1.C 'lv""I' ,_._,
-r-- '\>VI

,1•' Iy

l ':itm"'·_ "'" • '-1\

ruz._;~.::,f,...,i

C>v1, C,(
~'-"'~+-

Part 8- RESPONSE

RCUDFEB 10'10

l'art C· RECE!f>T
'BJ!TI'

EXHIBIT 41 251

__, _____
UNIT

31:L;'}")p fJ
APB~t I >JJ3:2

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 253 of 372 Page ID #:256
Response to Administrative Remedy Case Number: 576340-F1 This is in response to your Request for Administrative Remedy receipted in this office on February 10, 2010, in which you request the use of a TIY machine for calls. You wish to be connected to a relay service to make calls to non-hearing impaired contacts. An investigation into your complaint revealed you have received several successful calls using the TIY machine, and you have used a relay service. Accordingly, this response is for Informational Purposes only. If you are dissatisfied with this response, you may appeal by filing a BP-DIR-1 0 to the Bureau of Prisons, Southeast Regional Office, Attn: Regional Director, 3800 Camp Creek Parkway, SW, Building 2000, Atlanta, Georgia 30331-6226, within twenty (20) calender days from the date of this response.
Date
EXHIBIT41 252

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 254 of 372 Page ID #:257
EXHIBIT 42

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 255 of 372 Page ID #:258

u.s. D£PAIITMENT OV JUSTICE.
Pedml BltraK o(Priams

REQUl!'ST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

· · 1)j>.- oi-11#. bQil:.pou.i~ VQIIQ&hmmu.IUYI nui1MJ.·:J1.b,.Jt/Dflr coplu. AddilioMJ ~ Oft rrwrre.
.to FProda\mrJt,:AA~-UrA~\t+T L-A\.E SBtT~·rNll\yAi~Q.JaJ4U'n£BF.t<·"J.Slhlll8~f'DTt,aM>v~ ll·ildD~L~ED~~.!~.\T\e.I.:MtrQo'.~\lc.E'6~d'eqb-.~.hR7\.1E0\.G4. -t~N0)O{.1./'~(6\01W'\?\..b'S\~ e-".?. :,"U".N\IT,~!}\,7j\r~\d..dt.<-.U_VS1PJSAN'8C'Sl&1o'.nL1l1e"~'1mlJ0'\Na,\nP"."fI" '

\<k\w'\Sl:::f\
\<.u.~\ ~

~"I:.L ~ cltfl£..&_
ci~C'l.~h~OI'..

· ~d'\"~{' fiOt "tw1\JbLOC\. D+k tt"l~::. ~v((l t- <'M..~
\ ~ CJ,.\.H~ 'Qc..l~ V\a..\J...tl\~ ~?U--\Al ~~i;

"""''" ~"l..L O('.C)-Y4c ~1'\.«\~ ~~ l{fi.A... J...~( \ ·t(\wf ~~en 00 cle~-

~~~-.

r« ~-~ pf~-~~ t-k~sD.A/.Tt\-E.t0ilAeU.:IJ2~\.~c\>~c'l.\l~.'1~t7i.J~ ...:"·1n... \~ ~.a.~ t-l\h\~ ~m.~-~+~{?~ ~ cIioYO~A'c)~l£\e-~r.f~~\A_~~..f~1\~V·'€~=_S6I~GlNi~ ~AIcT-\U9~ -RuB-* .0P1-'e.R-}J'!t-Q~ \U?-llSW-~1-1~t;~Ro~0.n<-\*-r~-i-t-> --z..-_ Part B- RESPONSE

RCUO FEB 10 '10

-~~':..~~=-~!?~~------------"-'------------=-~~~-~2_k:~-------· DATI!
_ l/~wiiii-,.._.7A

WARDBN OR llllGIONAL DllU!CTO!l
_ . . . . . . . , _ F:ihn:ttJ,. ,_.,...,_,.._>Miatlu..,._,OJ]Iw_».,.,._..,.cf~7lttr

Part C- RECEIPT

C~NUMB~'------------

Return to:

~NAME, FIRST, MIDDLE INITIAL

REG. NO.

INSTITUTION

suw~'------~--------~-------------------------------------------

DATE

RECIPIENT'S SIONI\TUltl! (STAPP MEMBER)

81'-22;( APRil1•

EXHIBIT 42 254

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 256 of 372 Page ID #:259

Response to Administrative Remedy Case Number: 57834t·F1

This is in response to your Request' for Administrative Remedy receipted. in this office on February 10, 2010, in which you request a television in your assigned housing unit be programmed for closed captioning so you can enjoy television viewing. You also request to be transferred to an institution with other deaf inmates.

An investigation into Housing Unit (SHU),

your complaint revealed. that prior to your placement in the Special arrangements· were being made for programming a television with

closed captions. However, SHU inmates are not pennitted. television privileges.

Therefore, upon your release from SHU back to general population, you· may request

one of the unit televisions be programmed for closed caption viewing.

wdYeiolla·unfriorset bqbeueienasgdtdaforderdstrrseaesndsseafedgraintionAaidnnmtihninissitsirtteurastiptoiovnenwsReiteh. moethdeyr:Cdaesaef iNnmo.a5te7s63a3n4d-Fp1roagnradm; tsheforer ftohree,

. PdBiarsissseoadnti:ssof,ienSdoo·wuwt:ihtftie:n.adthsiinstg.Rrsee,gsyipQoounnarslreeO,qfyufioceues,UmAoatrty·nAa:dpRpmee~ignliiolsntbraayl,tfiDivlieniregRcateomrB.,eP3d.-8yD0Ii0Rs,-1CD0aEmtNopIEthCDer.eBeIukfyreoauuaoref

Parkway, SW, Building 2000, Atlanta, days. from the date of this response.

Georgia

3033'f-6226,

within

twenty

(20)calender

Date

EXHIBIT 42
255

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 257 of 372 Page ID #:260
EXHIBIT 43

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 258 of 372 Page ID #:261

l .S. Dt.•t..artnh'U1 nf Ju::.tit."t.'

Rt>gional Administrative Remedy Appeal

l'art \-REASON FOR -\PPEAL

my JflAisill\'.\pli.".'L:X.·On>>Jtt~.A;nk(..\l.\QAQ~t,v.ME+-,r..~\b...?.L.~-~-i.-~?.(0CJp}:ct~)ht.~tU.2,r'_De~d_l?ll<"\l&..)\1>.?.t'.,(n>/l.J~V'\C'\T.I"t4.~~_5:6.V.E~ ;n-;..,P~-{'<~:''c}n7'..'_.:~:/;-b\\t.!~~~.>:v.~~.\e'ESX<-1.\P\":'Q~\--::eA.:.u..\,:'.:<;L!-,L.'-.Q.t\;r*'l-tl7n~ .e-<-W\lt-A}L).LpaA~~t.r1ei~ ;\\t,~z.p.<(f\;n;;J,,9.r:_.tJ).),_:o..p._\-u.t,vdk,sN,'.D,,"f.l-':MrlJp.~t.i\&laz_llv;.NfJ~v2L.f'lu,ffi~l~\c«(~1{Yv"lf\\.A<.l.yL'.;t-J(UJ_b".L.fde-'•tN.pW~\;r-S.•N,*:-;1>xt-!-.r:c:"<Al.>;u}"d_v.'_me':..~wf-r.&\l~cc._h<uLrmLl(-.CT:(":~'\.,:y'(.Yut:;-zdJfsx<tIJ/~''{:1-.:.qJ,..'P(J\v.e..ct£'lt\tc.:'f[l:>,l<,+1tcD'<-Q<<".l:.:2t>hur~(::<c:;·.ips..:c_:.f_,N ,.Vr_?d,-J..lt.,t"k.\~t-";

~ le_!Nd..\.<0.'

;z;~tfk--:~+- C€-LGr'\Cx<C\l~«A\.\Jp.\2.id.f..Slx:?:\:,.eth:\'f:~:.lt1L1fRh\·:lfr~'1t/h'>0v<,0.A~:iys~tp~dJ)~U1\)''f<{_':zi,.\rl{D~\e.:~.r~I.r.('ou\:.w:,Ihll·w'~ -t&\y:-:.fAw"cw-t9:er:'rn-.".t-t".,sJ-5k,f1td:tG.>e'c:"c;:h.;.~):-wt3.o._:J,·-S,,:~.-RMFAc-Jf::1,~ddy5.11;~:2_~ 3.-':"fX;b,.\Xfdf.:l~J>.,~<<t\rrnF)~b.fJ.~ 21r..5~~tS(~ ts3n:3l4¥~--:FF:/I:?I.Rbr...d+-tdf*.e..r.5z1u.t..L.7~f:u:o~sl"Im?-'Yf'.Py3F-"-\Rtf~:A:·,.'-if1'-lA"'.:ie,.r<-·_e:_. 3/ii \?-D\0

rntE

Sl(iNAfURE OF RF<JL'ESl ER

Part B- RESI>ONSE

_}

D..UE

II di.;,:;,l.tl'>flL'd \1.-l!h. tl11" d,1y" tll tht' d.tk ut thJ~

rl'"\ptlns~, rt"~rnn-:.e.

ynu

m,ty

;~ppeLt!

tn

the

( ~~~nt::'ral

('o!m-,el.

Yllur

t~ppc:.ll

rnnst

be

rt-(t'IVcd

in

the

REGION:\L DIRECTOR Gcner..1l CtlUnsel·~ ( JffTL'C \\ 1th1o

JO

Ldcntlar

_ _ - OR!Cif:\A-L-. R-E-TU-RN-T-O-!N-M-!\T-E
Part C - RECEIPT

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

_

C

A

S

E

N

U

M

B

E

R

:

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

C:\SE NUMBER

Return t o : - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

S

U

B

J

L-\S f :-JA?I-fE.
ECT

RRST \11DDLE 1:-JlTIAL
---------

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

RHi.:\0.
----

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

L'NlT
--

-

-

-

-

-

-

10hHfl
---

TION
---

-

USP LVN

[L\1 E

SIGNATURE. REUPIENT OF REGIONAL -\PI'EAL
EXHIBIT 43

BP-::-30t 13) JUNE 2002

257

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 259 of 372 Page ID #:262
125 BROAD STREET NEW YORK, N.Y. 10004-2498
February 25, 2010
Via email and U.S. Mail Warden Scott A. Middlebrooks USP Coleman I U.S. Penitentiary P.O. Box 1023 Coleman, FL 33521 coalpublicinformation@bop.gov
Re: Responses to Requests for Administrative Remedy Inmate David Bryant, 06704-016
Dear Warden Middlebrooks: RtoecmlaerdifyyftohroCseaIsReaemNspuionmnrbseeecsresaip5nt7d6ot3fh3ey5oA-uFdr1mF1ei,nb5ir7sut6ra3ar3tyi6v1-eF1R,122e,0m51e70d3Ry3e7As-ppFoplne3asaelnssdptor5o7Ac3ed3sm8s.-iFn1is4traantidvwe rite
ocAInotmhmReemrerqdiucuenaeainscftaSinftieomgrnwaAtLietdahsmnawginnuodiarskpgtrremao(tgai"vrnAaeamSgRLeser"fsm)oareinndtdthyeecrCpodaroeesartedfe.iNrnfuaotmrorwbse,orro5kr7pa6lrt3oeg3rnr5aa-mtFivls,eiMlny,ro.arBdterrarynatosnfttemrredtqoeuraesstpatsrniadsonannwd ith ihIinnnemtaRelartepthqercsueateareesnrtdptforoporhrfoeeAglspdrsamihomiinmnsailsfcsotoraramntthidmveepudhnReaiaercfmma.taeecdwiysitCtsh,aomsereaNdlitucemarnlbasettiravf5ef7lay6n,3da3ht6re-aaFnllts,hfeMcrarrt.eoBparrpyoravinisdtoernresqw,uiietnhsctlosutadhnienrAgdSmeLaefntal pciInnortimeRsormepnqruewunteeiistcrhtafftoooetrrheeAefdfrdeudcmcetaiiatvnifeoiislnnytrmpawrtaoiitvteghesratRahmneedsminapesnrdtodryguvCrcoataomcsraesstiNfaoonnurdamtlhobpeterhodreger5ars7aft6.mu3ds3ei7nn-tsFo,lro,drMearrlt.toeBrtnmryadtaienvrtesrltyeaq,nuadetasrntasdnasfneAr tSoLa
EXHIBIT 43 258

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 260 of 372 Page ID #:263

Warden Middlebrooks -2-
As I Wlderstand it, you have consolidated the above referenced Requests for Administrative Remedy with Request for Administrative Remedy Case Number 576344-Fl and will respond to the consolidated Request for Administrative Remedy by March 2, 2010. At that time, if Mr. Bryant is unsatisfied with your Response, he may appeal the Response for the consolidated Administrative Remedy to the Bureau of Prisons' Southeast Regional Office. Any appeal ofthe consolidated Administrative Remedy will necessarily encompass Mr. Bryant's Requests for Administrative Remedy Case Numbers 576335-Fl, 576336-Fl, 57337-F1 and 57338-Fl.
I am available by telephone, (212) 558-1632, email, fitzwaterm@sullcrom.com. or facsimile, {212) 291-9282, at any time to discuss the Wlderlying issue of Mr. Bryant's need for effective communication and accommodations or to discuss the specific issues raised in this letter.
Respectfully yours,

cc:

Lisa M. SWlderman, Regional Counsel

Southeast Regional Office

Federal Bureau ofPrisons

3800 Camp Creek Parkway

Building 2000

Atlanta, GA 30331

Jeff Campbell, Legal Counsel USP Coleman I U.S. Penitentiary P.O. Box 1023 Coleman, FL 33521 j4campbell@bop.gov

4

In Request for Administrative Remedy Case Number 576337-Fl, Mr. Bryant requests the prison

to install strobes or vibrating alarms or provide him with a vibrating pager. Alternatively, Mr.

Bryant requests a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and programs for the deaf.

EXHIBIT 43
259

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 261 of 372 Page ID #:264
' ' / t 'l.>'firtlW'>.i t'""/'>ti\..l~~uf•l..:~>, "'"' '! \\ j '•'-\! ,iJ)1l "'\ '·' \"

Part \ 1.'\:'<fAT£ REQt'EST
::r: .:. ., ,, ~t </.."- \- '•\ "'.-,\(_

OSP Coleman I

t'"dt

I"S1TH•rtoN

X {;_,~ v ... vtyte \-n -...1--t.:.Vf"',.k----...A

A"'•'"'j, ~t~- l"··~.,,~_.,.,,

"""J (_a~l· .,_ 'r<,

r'c> v h ,. '-<-

o..- c<fl~""'-.v .... {c__c'v\..t_ ..1~-?.r~..--< ('-t
I

1 ___... .t.L-..

s. ~<l-._.""'-~~ c.•_....._A._ pr-.>:J ,- ·~ ,..¥J<.}' +-u· "'I L( '""''1 ,k~y -

Part IJ- RESPONSE

RC!JO FEB 10 '10

1/ di><Uii(/1<d ··;1h thf• Tl"Ji''""· o'''" ""'" ol,>f"•d (q /It<' f{,·~f<'m'/ fi(rf<'{dt
---------------------------------------- ------------------._-.J-_-. _6_l_(:'qfr~,>::_;l.Jl•lf': t!Rh.l:>. \!.: HFII K'i tfl 1'<'1 HE

)Nn •lf'prn/ m>"/ ~C nTe<<'CI/ in tit, f/cJ:f"mr/ tJ/}7.-t Wt(hiff Jf/,.,./,ndW J~p C\'ir C.:IIMAfR·

,;/1/:i< lrW·~

C \SF NUMIII R ------

EXHIBIT 43
260

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 262 of 372 Page ID #:265

INFORMAL RESOLUTION FORM

COC 1330.!6.A January 16, 2008
Attachment A

NOTICE TO INMATE: Bureau of Prisons Program Statement 1330.13 requires shall first present an issue of concern informally to staff and staff shall informally a BP-9. A separate form must be used for each issue.

that except attempt to

as provided in 542.13(b) an inmate resolve the issue prior to submitting

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

INSTRUCTIONS: Counselors will complete submitted, 1f not informally resolved.

and

attach

this

form

to

each

Request

for

AdministrativerF:oJl£)e-r9n) edy .

David Bryant

06704-016

Inmate Name

Regtster No.

Qtrs.fUmt

Inmate Signature

1.

Specific complaint (one 8 W' x II" continuation page may be attached):

I am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I cannot understand or communicate

effectively with
prison's ~-

people who do not know ASL. I am unable to understand or communicate Among other problems, this means that I cannot hear calls for line-up.

effectively

with

the

-2.

What efforts have been made by the inmate to resolve the complaint infonnaJJy? To whom has the inmate spoken?

3.

What action does the inmate wish to be taken to co~the issue?

siiiiiiii ASL interpreter for communications with the prison's
routine announcements. That the prison's~ who knows

and ASL

a vibrating pager for ca11s be assigned to my unit as

to line-up and other much as possible. As

an alternative, a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and programs for the deaf.

DUMM Correctional Counsel' (OUHSUOR

Staff Circle One:
~

Not Informally Resolved

Distribution by Correctional Counselor:

I. If complaint is informally resolved, maintain original on file in the Unit.

2. If complaint processing.

is

!!.Ql

informally

resolved,

attach

original

to

BP-9

Form

and

forward

to

Administrative

Remedy

Clerk

for

Date: Time: Counselor.

lnf. Resolution Form Issued to Inmate
\ \ 2.1\1 \)
1 (;)<.) 0
551-

lnf. Resolution Form Returned to
ll Counselor ~ 41 tt:> p,o o
~

BP-9lssued to Inmate

BP-9 Returned to Counselor

BP-9 Delivered to Admin Remedy Clerk

NYI2528:416071.1

EXHIBIT 43 261

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 263 of 372 Page ID #:266
Response to Administrative Remedy Case Number. 576334-F1
This is in response to your Request for Administrative Remedy receipted in this office
on February 10, 2010, in which you request staff trained in American Sign Language (ASL) be assigned to your housing unit. In addition, you request to be provided with a
vibrating pager to notify you of count time or a transfer to a facility housing hearing
impaired inmates. Investigation of this matter revealed at the present time, there are no provisions in policy to provide hearing impaired inmates 'Nith pagers or ASL trained staff. However,
you are provided with a hearing aid and new batteries for the deVice as needed. While you maintain a vibrating pager is necessary to notify you of count time, you have never failed to be prasent or stand for count, as evidenced by your lack of disciplinary history
for failure to stand count: In regard to your request for a transfer, hearing impaired inmates maintain the same care level as sight impaired inmates. and thus. are housed in Care Level1-2 facilities, as no specialized program is currently in place. Accordingly, your request is Denied. If you are dissatisfied with this response, you may appeal by filing a BP-OIR-1 0 to the Bureau of Prisons. Southeast Regional Office, Attn: Regional Director. 3800 Camp Creek Parkway, SW. Building 2000, Atlanta, Georgia 30331-6226, within twenty (20) calender days from the date of this response.
Date
EXHIBIT 43
262

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 264 of 372 Page ID #:267

l'.S. DEPART:\IE:'>T OF Jt:STICE

REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

From: ____ . Bryant. David D.
L.\ST "'AME. FIRST, ~1JOI)LE ll'olllAL

06704-016
Kt:(;, '10.

Jl.SJ?_ Coleman I_
1'-.SIITlTION

Part A- INMATE REQliEST

;:;_\\-._ (,)LJ.:..

\ ,._, .. ,· \n•~,· :t."''','.~\ t,~\\\,l'"~J-"-~

,..

__.

,

.

.

_

_n. .o, \r' ' -,-\-•' '

-

·u' -''-""

1'

-,1, \

,l\'-'1. '-"'

)',·' _.,

0 L:\::<_..L-~ J.... l-\oL'\

-, J

..

\r:;,,,,,.\'

v< ·~~...-~"-(Y\,L\.J\ ( -).__~ v~~~(_~''"o:-'_\,, ~_;'; ~-~-, •\.--.!c_y\(_, l.)._\·c) \.:tt- 1\·Lt \L.J.\CL~ -~ -·x_ I ... Y\ L'- ·\,;.._.tl~ n.;; \-).'-~~,(_,\,~);..t:t:._

,
. . '(

-k.-
1. 'l

ct'·\,Ch

·

.
\1 \

Jk'l'J.}-.~ ;.,; eft :::_tD<.•::i:.\1 ~4. ~ \A)()('(_

?' ·1J~_,. ~ .':J.i3... \. ,'--~

\.~ '-.li·.. 1',- ~,,.,---.. ,),,o ... f•\..•->

1-_)-I.,L t~_,•, .......... ·-f•

\ )J,'\.L~·lWC {\.) ,_<_:r~x_r

0~_--'"_'*,,V./"-

:;/
_,

('_:,,'"""·r

-"'-"'

_..... ,

,,_~-L_ -1.'-

,_ ...

r-t•·'\_

M-c:,\ .J. I ,_2.; } ..;, ,c*, ,l.l\t·l_._,,J h ',t,:Y' '(_ \.;..<:l;,t'.i.r_ \.._,,cZ, '--\-:::,'-'"' 1:1

-~'\)I'..L<;J f-k.iu'"''''\ '---'.C\•t

(''::_,HU'') ,J.[·J...,

-:J:cv.,\d,_

l

1
1-);L

~

11..\0-.v:J-

-h-,,,

ttz._

~HL-l, ~ ~,-\\\.\

v:L>..J.c--:l

r,c:.\- \)-t.. ;:~\z_ \d \\\\ c;v._\: -1:\.z. v.:J:::J.'{_ ,:c-y_;,,~~'''"':rr \ 11'"-'--" k ~(Y', .-:x- >L~l;tc-n""-\'( <:-~x\,Y\.J.;.. ,1u.;k

w'J.c\, \!-.':,(_-,{'\._ fi\,l.,_ri:C~C.:o J.rd.., CCC;;,.::)_, 'L--tt'x ', L'-"t-tt•c~.A.+ T" k'SL. ••\~\'~1d':-.

~x ~Jl.Ji..,

(1./.).AY:. l ;,..v-.._
,

\i....>l~.:.-nr-ii_fi''- k~L r)\~ \,Y--Q..~\

I

i)

\;~

._o,.,;:'(_

0\~0-~L··'"\
1 <l

,

,-, ~" )_c:;

..,.., '--'

<...•-

,\<.'\!'

·\""'':':>~( v'' ·~0•TV' c;,l..c;..~ ,,~ Yj'\":'Z' ------~"~--/c'c.·{f .~-::_,L

<.1:::\'{\'\~.l,;.<\.!:_c·¥- '-'-"'_,..\, \)-'C'.\:_ \'f'?._.'\':.:~_:":-, -~~ r::!..()(:.ll.._,,,:I;:!~<,.,

\"s \ 'X'\

;:__\\;-'\C'·:·;.,-*'".c_

, \ \:>:_.'-"" ;,.\-

7-.__

\G ;..

2:><::1'-

cAl.":

,,

--.c.,-X_

I

~:7- _L(-/ {;

~J

~},/

1;,
11

j
___

PATE

'ilt' A fi:RE r)F RF<)IIESTFR

Part B- RESPONSE

RC'JD Ft8 W '10

DAlE

1/ di\·r;atisjied with rhi.~ rc.~ponve, ).'OU ma.Y app~al w rh~ ReKilmal Diuctor. Your appeal rtJU\t he rtaH•t>d in the RegwnaJ O_lfrce \<. tlhin 20 I:a/cndar.dm,:\ oj the daiP rlf rhi" !>.';J!On'ie.

ORH;IN-\L: RETt R;\' TO 1:'>11\1.\TE

C\SE NUMRER ~ 7/e .-) Jc:-,2-r_l_

Part C- IUTEJPT

Rt·tunl to

L.-\ ST N \.ME. FIRST. ~1101)1 .F 1'-ilTIAL

\l RJH.T'

Rn; 'HJ

C-\SE N!I'-'IRER. __ · - - - - - - - - - · - - · - - · · -

1'.'-IT

!C.ST!TUTHJ"'

'1 \IF

EXHIBIT 43 263

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 265 of 372 Page ID #:268

INFORMAL RESOLUTION FORM

COC 1330.16.A January 16, 2008
Attachment A

NOTICE TO INMATE: Bureau of Prisons Program Statement 1330.13 requires shall first present an issue of concern informally to staff and staff shall informally a BP-9. A separate form must be used for each issue.

that except attempt to

as provided in 542.13(b) an inmate resolve the issue prior to submitting

• •• •••••••••••• • •••••• ••• •••• •••••• •••••• • ••• ••• • ••• ••• • •• ••

INSTRUCTIONS: Counselors will complete submitted. if not informally resolved.

and

attach

this

form

to

each

Request

for

Administrative

David Bryant Inmate Name

06704-016 Register No.

QtrsJUnit

I.

Specific complaint (one 8 'h" x II" continuation page may be attached) ;

I am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I cannot understand or communicate

effectively with people who do not know ASL. I am unable to participate effectively in the prison's work programs

because I am unable to understand or communicate with work managers and coordinators.

l (( ~Lt ~ '1-ko. ~\561"\J. 2.

What effons have been made by the inmate to resolve the complaint informally? To whom has the inmate spoken?

Q

ll::()( \(_ tl'\

(

3.

What action does the inmate wish to be taken to correct the issue?

ASL interpreter for work programs in order to understand and communicate with work managers and coordinators.

As an alternative, a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and programs for the deaf.

Staff Circle One:
~Not Informally Resolved

Distribution by Correctional Counselor:

I. If complaint is informally resolved. miuntain original on file in the Unit.

2. If complaint processing.

is

!lQ!

informally

resolved,

attach

original

to

BP-9

Form

and

forward

to

Administrative

Remedy

Clerk

for

Date: Time: Counselor:

lnf. Resolution Form Issued to Inmate
~~u)to
lQO 0
5:5::=:

lnf. Resolution Form Returned to Counselor \
1~1..! (0
I ~~c
%:---

BP-9 Issued to Inmate

BP-9 Returned to Counselor

BP-9 Delivered to Admin Remedy Clerk

NYI2528:416076.1

EXHIBIT 43 264

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 266 of 372 Page ID #:269
Response to Administrative Remedy Case Number: 576335-F1 ciTrFneohemqmibsuarmeutisesaustirnnytiaocrn1aeb0dtse,epp2aoer0osnf1fsgse0iregca.ntmtioveYesdoylyufoaounwrariltitlhrneheetgqesedurtpaeebrfasefe,ftct.esfaoprureosAcreidbfiymecoaiutnlrlaiyusnstwrseaofetrsikrvirgeemndRalaetnonmagageunedaorysgtheraeenycrdoeinuicpsoatteiortdeurdtouiionnnnaatwbolrietsh.todYeoauf dtcy5rpIhneoo7eeevsur6narep3rdefasoe4icatlnnssi4tnggispoo-daeFonrtrn1aeiateoos,glqvneayuoCibrooeftdaorfufsiaiscnttttemehihganriasaNsgattyromaapcr.fneanaial5dqessgt7teufeeoea6.errrtn3shfrt4Ioteoeaf4rfvrpyo-aweoppFrnaureh1aiolaessnatiolnhsryinetenhoadrtursnnueoitonneracuptosufgtrtsfourhie(atrnuCteyttecitohnasierouetfstmlinyeoeoadewhnpaNnapiswottMvhsr.iooteiahs5drprta7ewrctynih6haaaoe3ftAru2e3nirdn,4eiwpnmm2-srFig0topiahn1s1cotie0es)cna.s.tdorsreuemaIaYnrtnmmetiovotdshuaeu.iCdpsnsReraihocs.esoagaemutrTmialneNdhemgdeowycs.waafisitotherf,othre ddAPPaicarsiycrssksooawrntfdirassoiy,nfmi,geSldSoythW,uwett,ihhtdheiBsaautthcseilaitdsosRinerfeegtgihss2piios0conl0rnoae0ssls,eepO,Adoftyfnlaioacssuneet,R.amAE,atPGtynEe:aoTpRrIpgTeeiIgaVaiolE3nb0aoy3lf3fDai1liin-pr6ger2eca2tvo6iBor,,uPw3s-8iDtfh0iIliRi0nn-gC1t.w0aIemftnoypottyuhC(er2ae0rBee)ukcreaaleunodaf r
j, .~ 1 / Lull.
Date
EXHIBIT 43
265

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 267 of 372 Page ID #:270

h .:dt:r..li Bureau •1I Pn~on";.

REQl'EST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE RE\IEDY

From: _ _ ___.B~r...ly--'a~n~t=-'-'----"D~a~V~l.;c.d~__.D"--!_._ _ __
LAST -,A,\H<:. FIRST. :\llllr>LE INITL\L
l'art A- IN.\1ATE REQUEST

06704-016
REI;, NO,

USP Coleman__I

l''ilT

INSnnrnoN

i I>'

•;,.<' _; .....,.._ ~

. .''·'<JJ,·s'~"<<J.... ,;;. L\.1' ;::{> 1 t,.,~"h/ ' ((>1\fi\.U,\<cZ,x<- ,r. \ \Y--y'" r.X.::o 1-'.x: '<·;; 'c,,._,~.A c)L

):_ \' 1)

(_'\ • - }\?: ',.';:l (){ ~~ '-' i\t<\lL·~t J .k_ :_".,'(( d'v• 'j ._,:, '' c <\' '.,..) • r z_{ ··c·b. r~ .~ \,.( 't\~ J, u~, L

..,.. ;_._, \ , " ~,-<-;•. '\ f'<'•..: ~.uJ \.,Jt

'"'·'A·' '· :..c, c~··; U · .L,_n ..•....;,.__ ..,)\ 1 J. 1 11, ::.;'>"':.

.,.,

1

A\\(vl

1 •\

;_.::: 1 ,t(.,..n

~ ·;, ~L·~ ' '

L<'-:J.\\·,\1,

.;,.~:·\"V

\
:k(

·+c:,

AoL

\---0 '(\

\•'.J.~i£.:.~'"'"" /.~·( <• •

~"'"·"'-

\"(:, Cc:.•··,t'r·,t1{"( :<+C '-"~\h. ~11_':..->l-. \•Q_,;I.+\r,

2- c;-; (:'~--
:)ArE
l'art R- RESPONSE

·~ (-!
:/_./ c:~·'C_./

U\TF

1\' \RDEN < >R REGIO'iAL fliRFC fOR

n; ~(c -:j~~L fj' dt<":satH/i~:·d with Ihi~' rnpanH!, rou mav appeal to tht' ReJ;rmwl lhrrctar, hwr appeal mtnt he ruei~-vtl in tht> Rt>f!WUai Offit·r .,.._·rthirt ]fl calendar da~·s ojlht' ,wr.e ;}f th,-~ r'f'';JZilmt-'.

<lRH;IN \L: RE'ITRN TO 1/<i;\L\

C \Sf. >.;t i.'v!BER:

Part ( ·- KITEIIYf

l~cf!Jrn to

---~·~----
1 .\\ f ~:,\ \1F:. I IR'i'l

\1lDLH £ lNITIA.L

'>I HJEC

:c. --~~~··- ·~-

-····---~-··--·

!{f( ll'IU'I oi<;'C\Il i<E \I \f'l- \H-\18ri<<

EXHIBIT 43
266

I NSTITLTI0:-.1

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 268 of 372 Page ID #:271

COC 1330.16.A Januasy I6, 2008
Attachment A

INFORMAL RESOLUTION FORM

NOTICE TO INMATE: Bureau of Prisons Program Statement 1330.13 requires shall first present an issue of concern informally to staff and staff shall infonnally a BP-9. A separate form must be used for each issue.

that except attempt to

as provided in 542.13(b) an inmate resolve the issue prior to submitting

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

INSTRUCTIONS: Counselors will complete subnutted, tf nottnfonnally resolved.

and

attach

this

form

to

each

Request

for

AdmimstratJve

R ' S J / I J d-9:)t J . F

David Bryant Inmate Name

06704-016 Register No.

Qtrs.!Urut

Inmate Signature

1.

Specific complaint (one 8 W' x II" continuation page may be attached) :

I am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I cannot understand or communicate

effectively with people who do not know ASL. I am unable to understand or communicate effectively with medical

staff and healthcare providers, including mental healthcare professionals and pharmacists.

1<.?..kdt Our;..g b'(. \2.

What efforts have been
~ ~w ,I\

made

by the inmate to
l&l~

resolve the complaint infonnally7 To
bg_,\oooa.Dk

whom has the inmate spoken?
l :T,cl'-N'!..\\

3.

What action does the inmate wish to be taken to correct the issue?

ASL interpreter for communications with medical staff and healthcare providers, including mental healthcare

professionals and pharmacists. As an alternative, a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and programs for the

deaf.

Co

G. DUNN Correctional {OOJ6RlJR

Staff Circle One:
~U~ R::t;;,

Not lnformaUy Resolved

Distribution by Correctional Counselor.

I. If complaint is infonnally resolved, maintain original on file in the Unit.

2. If complaint processing.

is

!!Qt

informally

resolved,

attach

original

to

BP-9

Form

and

forward

to

Administrative

Remedy

Clerk

for

Date: Time: Counselor:

lnf. Resolution Form Issued to Inmate
112-:dto
IOOO
~

Inf. Resolution Form Returned to Counselor
lbd!b
l]'bo
~

BP-9 Issued to Inmate

BP-9 Returned to Counselor

BP-9 Delivered to Admin Remedy Clerk

NY 12528:416074.1

EXHIBIT 43
267

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 269 of 372 Page ID #:272

Response to Administrative Remedy Case Number: 576336-F1
dYcTFoeohemauibsfrmruiiesnauqmrinnuyiaecr1tasee0ttss,etpo2aoe0nnbf1dfsee0ecp.atrtisoovYsgeoiygrlyuoanumweardlistlreheafgoqnserutaitebnhfsfete,etcrsdfapopeurreaesAcfet.eidfyirmcooaiurnllyibusestmreatertasdivinigcesnafRellaresrntmeagdfeufdtaaoygnaedrenyhcooeetuhiapelatterhrdeicnasuortnneitaupbtrilooenvtiodweitrhs. dt5rcypIhenoo7eeesvur6anpre3rdfeaose4iacltnnss4itnggspio-odaeoFnrrtn1aeietaoos,glqvneayouCibroofetdaorfufsiaiscnttttemehhiganriasaNsgattyromaapcr.fneaanial5dqesgst7teufeeoea6.errtnr3shfrI4toteofea4rfvypro-aweoFpprnaure1haoilasesnatiolnhsrynietenhodartursnnueoitonnerauctpsougftrstfourhie(atrnCuteyttecithonasierouetfsmltinyeoeaoedwhnpaNnapiswottMvhsri.ooteiahs5drprta7ewrctihny6haaaoe3tfAru2e3nird,n4eiwpnmm2-srFgi0otpiahsn11cotie0esn)ac..sdtosrreuemaIaYnrtnmemtoiovdtsuhaeu.CidpsnsReraihocs.esoagaemutTrmialnNedhemgdeowycs.waafisiottherf.othre ddPPAaiarcsiycrssksooawrntfdirassoiy,nfmi,egSdlSoythW,uwett,ihhtdheiBsaauttchseilaitdsosRinefreegthgiss2ipiso0conl0rnoae0ssls,eepO,Adofytfnlaioacssuneet,R.amAE,atPGtynEe:aTopRrIpgTeeiIgaVaiolE3nb0aoy3lf3fDai1liin-pr6ger2eca2tvo6iBor,,uPw3s-D8itfh0iIlRii0nn-g1Ct.w0aIemftnoyptoytuhC(er2ae0rBee)ukcreaaleundoaf r

ebrooks, Warden

Date·

EXHIBIT 43 268

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 270 of 372 Page ID #:273

t:.S. UEPARTI\1F"iT OF J{1STICE

REQlJEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

From:

Bryant, David D.

~-----~----~---

L.\ST "'AME. HRST, MIDDLE lr-.ITL\L

!'art A- l1'iMATE REQUEST

06704-016
REt;. 'iO.

L'<IT

USP Coleman I
INSTITJITION

't7x \-~-+ ',;2__ 1 ,. ,·..~,

,-t-:r \ ·''"" {1'-fl<.G

f.l'c A-':>L "'':<-'( j)f<:\'C/ ~ ~ 1"'-- ~d.J_u::._..._{-1~\ \)(\Y'f""'-.:3 ;..JJ-..-

f(;(_J.-\-tc<-\,;j_ pte''-

1 n o.·7]"- -'\::;:; '-'~I:)V<t_J_ Jf0 UXf\.!'1\AJ..('.\CI'-..\-e_ ?_~Ct:\'ve...k( w ~:+k ~-"- ll)~)fud("(<,

1t '(jX C:•.\;1:-a: _::,'l:t..d-..<' ,+-) . A:_., ' ·"-\ ~" \~\ (' ~~\i :(__, l l ( <.::1 \..W )\- L 't-IL< ·:)~ ~ t\'.:~ ;;,. ?<\':>()I\ \.,J \~ (, ·\-C:;

clkL'~-':- \II iWMt' •, )i u,l \)' W~ 3\CI'~ ~~- +k -~--~:A_~

(~ //

I D_· ~/ --- L- j- - . - - -
DATE

~I~'

-( _/ ,!

,A-:~~----4o0o::.~C::::=---""":__ _

_

_

_

_

_ _

\I

Part B- RESPONSE

0

•

(Lt-t_rxcJlC &_

fWJD FEB 10 '10

DAff'

WAKDEN OR REGIONAI~--DIRECTOR

If diuati\fit'd w1rh lhir rf'\pome, HJU mav uppt'(li to thf Ref!ional {Jirrt·tor. Your appeal murt he rut·;,•cd in the ReKionul 0/jict wilhin lO calendar day.f of(h£ dait' ojthi1 r~vpwJ.c.

ORJ(;t:''</AL: RET{;I{N TO 1"-\IATE

CASE ~UMBER: 5'](c,3_-:"Jl-cJ

l'art C- RECEIPT

Rv1t1rn to

LA'>T ';AMF. HRST, \-11DDLL l'ill IAL

:iLBJLCI

- - - - - - - - - - - ~-~--------

CASE NUMBER: __ _ I''HT

IN<;TTTiiTI< lN

RLCIPII·NI'S >1<,,'-i\ITIH r.>;I.-\H· \11:\Hlf'l<l
EXHIBIT 43
269

3P<l?'~1 l! ~PR~L 1-::,8?

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 271 of 372 Page ID #:274

COC 1330.16.A January 16, 2008
Attachment A

INFORMAL RESOLUTION FORM

asNhBOalPTl-If9Ci.rEstATpsOreepsIeaNnratMtaeAnfToisrEsm:uemBouufsrcteoabnuecouesrfnePdirnifsofoornremsaacPlhrloyigstsroaumes.taSftfaatenmd esntatff13sh3a0l.l13infroeqrmuiarellsy

that except attempt to

as provided in 542.13(b) an inmate resolve the issue prior to submitting

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

INSTRUCTIONS: Counselors will submitted, if not informally resolved.

complete

and

attach

this

form

to

each

Request

for

Administrative

Remedy

F

David Bryant Inmate Name

06704-016 Register No.

Qtrs./Unit

I.

Specific complaint (one 8 112' x II" continuation page may be attached) :

I am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I cannot understand or communicate

effectively with people who do not know ASL. I am unable to participate in the prison's education programs and

vocational programs because I cannot understand or communicate effectively with the instructors or other students.

I &'b.£4. 2.

What
N..\lt.

efforts have been made by the
~i\'~

inmate to resolve the complaint informally?
lA)~ Q:i.ucbhci\A.l

To whom has the

inmate spoken?

3.

What action does the inmate wish to be taken to correct the issue?

ASL interpreter for the education programs and vocational programs in order to understand and communicate

effectively with the instructors and other students. As an alternative, a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates

and programs for the deaf.

Staff Circle One:

R~ d m a l l y

Not Informally Resolved

Date

Distribution by Correctional Counselor:

I. If complaint is informally resolved. maintain original on tile in the Unit.

2. If complaint processing.

is

!121.

informally

resolved.

attach

original

to

BP-9

Form

and

forward

to

Administrotive

Remedy

Clerk

for

Date: Time: Counselor:

Jnf. Resolution Form Issued to Inmate
1 \l1l1u
It<!.;! D
55'

Inf. Resolution Form Returned to Counselor
\ ~ '1-\ 1( 0
s\11:'0

BP-9 Issued to Inmate

BP-9 Returned to Counselor

BP-9 Delivered to Admin Remedy Clerk

NY12528:416070.1

EXHIBIT 43
270

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 272 of 372 Page ID #:275

Response to Administrative Remedy Case Number: 576337-F1
dcYTFoeheomaibusrfmuriisenauqmrinnyuiacer1tasee0ttss,epto2aoe0nnfb1fdsee0ecp.atrtisoovYsegoiyglruyoanumweardlisltreheafgoqnserutaitebnhfsefte,etcrsfdapopeurreaesAceft.eidfyirmcooaiurnllyibusesteredatrutasivcingeasntfiReolarenrnmeagdenuddtaoygvearoencycoaoettuhiipoeatnerradeilnpsuotrnniotaugbtrilaoemntowsittahff. t5ydcrpIhneoo7eeevsur6naerp3derfsaoe4icatnlnssi4tnggispoo-daeFonrtrn1eaiaetoos,glqvneayouCibroofetdarfoufsiaiscnttttemehihganriasaNgsattyromaapcr.fneanaial5dqessgt7tuefeeoea6e.rrtnr3shfr4tItoeoeaf4rfvrpyo-aweopFprnaurhe1aoileassnatoinlhsryniteenohadrtursnnueoitonnercauptosugftrtsfuorhie(tarnuCteyttectihnoasierotuefsmltinyoeeoaedwhnpaNnaipwstotMvhsr.iooteiahsd5rprta7ewrctnyih6ahaaoe3ftAru2e3nirdn,4iewpnmm2-sriFg0topiahns11cotie0esc)an.s.todrsreumeaIaYnrtnmmietovotdsuhaeu.iCdpnssReraihcos.esoaagmeutTrmialnehNdemgdeowycs.waafisitotherf,othr e dPdAPaiacrsiycrssksooawrntfdirassoiyn,fmi,geSlSdoythW,uwetti,hhtdheiBsaauttchseilaitdsosRinefreegtghiss2iiposc0onl0rnoae0ssls,eepO,Adofytfnlaioacssuneet,R.amAE,atPGtynEe:aTopRrIpgTeeiIgaVaiolE3nb0oay3lf3fDai1liin-pr6egr2eca2tvo6iBor,,uPw3s-8iDtf0hilliR0inn-gC1t.w0aIemftnoyptoytuhC(er2ae0rBee)ukcreaaleundoaf r

Scott A. Midctlebrooks, Warden
·~_)

Date

EXHIBIT 43 271

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 273 of 372 Page ID #:276

L.S. OFP\RTME"'T OF IC-.Tf( F.

REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

From:

Bryan~, David D.
1..\ST NAME. FIR~T. \IlDDLE 1:'-<ITL\L

Part ,\-!;'>;MATE REQCEST

0 6 7 0 4-Q_l.fi__
KEG. "10.

..-.ll.S.E_...c.o.l..ema a I

(i\111

I--;STITI' I"ION

Part B- RESI'ONSE

RCUD FEB J0 ·;o

IJ.\ l"E

W \IUlEN OK KEGIO:".\l. I>IKLCTOK

Part C- REl'EII'T

Rl.:IHJn iu

-·------- -·------1.\ST N.->.\1E. FJ!l';r ~11lii11.L I"!TI \L

\I Bll<. I

(- \'iE :"\JI\1REI<.: - - - - - - - - - - - lNSTITUTJ( !N

il\fF

-· ~--·--------~-·---~
I{H 'II'! EN I., ,JG'<c\ fl'RF IST \H- \1f"~.10ER"•

EXHIBIT 43
272

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 274 of 372 Page ID #:277

INFORMAL RESOLUTION FORM

COC 1330.16.A January 16, 2008
AuachmentA

• • • • • • • • asNhBOalPTl-If9Ci.rEstATpsOreespIeaNnratMtaeAnfToisrEsm:uemBouufsrcteoabnuecoeurfsnePdirnifsfooornremsaacPlhrloyigstrsoaumest.aSftfaatenmd esntatff13sh3a0l.l13infroerqmuiarlelsy

that el!cept as provided in 542.13(b) an inmate attempt to resolve the issue prior to submitting

•••• ••••••• • •••••• •••••••••••••••••• •••••••• ••••••••

INSTRUCTIONS: Counselors will complete submitted, if not informal! y resolved.

and

attach

this

form

to

each

Request

for

Administrative

Remedy

F

David Bryant Inmate Name

067044)16 Register No.

QtrsJUnit

I.

Specific complaint (one 8 'h'' " II" continuation page may be attached) :

I am a deaf inmate. Since I am deaf, I am unable to hear even loud noises. I am unable to hear the prison's alarms.

I miss important warnings and announcements.

2.

What efforts have been made by the inmate to resolve the complaint informally? To whom has the inmate spoken?

3.

What action does the inmate wish to be taken to correct the issue?

the Strobe or vibrating alarms or a vibrating pager. As an alternative, a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and
with programs for deaf.

Statr Circle One:
~~

Not Informally Resolved

Distribution by Correctional Counselor:

I. If complaint is informally resolved, maintain original on file in the Unit.

2. If complaint processing.

is

!l.Q1

informally

resolved,

attach

original

to

BP-9

Form

and

forward

to

Administrative

Remedy

Clerk

for

Date: Time: Counselor.

lnf. Resolution Form Issued to Inmate
t()J\\D
~

lnf. Resolution Form Returned to Counselor
dldlo

BP-91ssued to Inmate

BP-9 Returned to Counselor

BP-9 Delivered to Admin Remedy Clerk

NYI2528:416066.1

EXHIBIT 43
273

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 275 of 372 Page ID #:278

Response to Administrative Remedy Case Number: 576338-F1
pTpiFmarheopgibsgoerrurrias.taamrinnYystor1wfueo0asr,aprt2lnsoh0ionen1sgrd0ese.e.qtaouYfB.eoyesuoctuaatroullresbeegeqeuytorebausentcasfaforeuerrsArdeeeddyamoft,iounyiaasonrtureoartutehivnqeeaur beiRnlseest tmttiootuehtbdieoeynaprrewrpocirtevhisiidpoditnneegdaafwloaininrthmmsaatavenisbdraamntidnisgs t5dcrpyIhneoo7eeevsur6narep3drefasoe4icatlnnss4itnggispo-odaeFonrtrn1aeiaetoos,glqvneayouCibroofetdaofrufsiaiscnttttmeehhgianriaasNsgattyromapacr.fneaanial5dqessgt7teufeeoae6.errntr3shfrI4ttoeeaof4rfvrypo-aeowpFprnauer1haoilasesantiolnhsrynetienhoadrtrnsunueoitonnerauctpsoufgtftrsourhie(atrnuCteyttecithonsaieroeutfstmilneoyeaodewhpnaNnapwistotMhvrssi.oteiahsod5prta7errctiyhn6hawaoe3tfAau2e3irr,nd4enwpmm2-sirinF0topiahng11cotise0es)cn.s.dtoasrumeraIaYnertnmteiovotdmsuheu.CiapnssRdraihcoseesoaga.emutrmilanTeNdemghdowyecs.waafiisottherf,othr e ddAPPaicarsiycrssksooawrntfdirassoiy,nfmi,egSdSloythW,uwett,ihhtdheiBsaauttchseilatidsosRinefreegthgiss2iipso0don0ronae0ssls,eepO,Adoftyfnlaioacssuneet,R.amAE,atPGtynEe:aoTpRrIpgTeeiIgaVaiolE3nb0aoy3lf3fDai1liin-pr6ger2eca2tvo6iBor,,uPw3s-8iDtfh0iIliiR0nn-gC1t.w0aIemftnoyptoytuhC(er2ae0rBee)ukcreaaleundoaf r

brooks, Warden

21
Oat~

[I

i I

i

,.

I Q

EXHIBIT 43 274

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 276 of 372 Page ID #:279

l'.S. Dt•parlment •>f Ju<tite Feder Jl Bureau td Prbnn~

Regional Administrative Remt>dy Appeal

lypc ~'r Ll'-i..' b.dl·pmrtl p<:'l

\\'l!h tht::.. .trpe..d.

From

E

Part .\ • REASON FOR APPEAL

().pl-() L{- 0\lo
REG '<0

U":_)'? Cole m J,t\

lt:-.i!T

II\:'> TITLTION

~Bl~k\\Qt~c(B:re{~\vllX~t-Jj'..d.f-..r\ftX.<.nv~b\'B/L:(:P:U\:CQ\:Yf..kJc?)qi).j~.'~J.\~r\bo\Yi\~l..JIu.\-c\.Qf£((>Jn'(}t0t(3l'~c\~f~ ~- l\lsyz~c-~Dr-~ \td~I(.-L~l'\h:tte~ lt-~:f~~p~(\~ n,(~s~ \:~vAJ.f\.9l~.-f(VW1\we\\'_/'\'oG:d~(r_~J~U\Ap&~,..nrb1o-c~~f(Dl.\~1.ny+'h{~ _-Ak~t.V~r& (._fc~ . :Yftu~ ~\ 'Sfh~\~<Oc~).f+JL<'J.::Nn,Q3L.fr:N.£tL,-(\\+.cs.~~ h/JA._e~..z-..j~lQe_.k_(l.)vq~trIdsu·rA\~J.<.sd.nYdl,.,\J.1.r.wt"-'f).ti~.,.el...\a:Ilde~h;tlV?~.l:~:S.Jivtrf~,~Yd\~J

S0a\~\..+[y~\'Sc&.uu.Qu.e~ m h1\

'

i

\L
(f\

~~J\UD..-t~ kt( 1~n~~1~ .-:)\_t:.

d\-.\1\:t,i'nt.J..t~

L::iJJ\\- cl~-~~~
\:...,c...'u_d..._ t'N_ 0--.f~ \ t<.w;l:

iv-f!\coZ \-c:.

Jti~OIC ;~ ¥1\.iif/.J\
_ 3___);._:..:._:::...:;:~.::::__-DATE

c__l~U-{Jhffit(' ~ '(\..

~//

.:::& ) () ......,....<..:.c__-,-_:~=_,c_-\-/:'~-;;IIC~;N:"":.\'ffU~R~-~~R~E~Q':':"L:::-cES~T~ER::-------

Part 8 - RK'>PONSE

I)

;
,,

-

-

-

,

r

. .

DATE

rh1~ rcspon-.~. lf dt-;sallst1ed Wt~h
days of the dJle uf

this

respon.;,c.

you

may

app~ai

to

rhe

G.:ner ..d

Counsel.

Y11ur

Jppeal

mu~t

be

rece 1ved

in

fhe

REGIO:-IAL DIRECTOR G~nerJ.I Counsel':-. Office w 1tht

10 . 1 J·

n - t.:J en ar

~!GlNAL:~ETuR~T~lNMATE .5?1R3c;/1- _ _ _ _

CASE NUMBER:

_.(J

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Part C - RECEIPT

CASENUMBER: - - - - - - - - -

Re{Unt to: -SUBJ

- - ; - : - : ;L:A:S:T:N- A: -M;E-, :F-IR:S-T:,:\:l l-D-D:L:E: :1-:-:II:T-IA-L- - ECT:--------------------

------

-

-

-

-

-

-

REG. ---

NO. --

-

-

1

:

-

<

-

·

:

:

UNIT .·_

r

r

_

T

l

-

I

T

I

_

O

_

N

_

tJSPJVN

DATE

SIGNATURE. RECIPIENT OF RHiiONAL:\PPL\L
EXHIBIT 43
275

8P·230(13) !! )...j~ ':lf!rt?

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 277 of 372 Page ID #:280

U.S. DEPAil'JMENT 0¥ JUSJ1CK Pedenl Buri:au ofl'rioou

REQUFST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

or 1\Pe .W bQJJ~ P'is: Jf 01111clunntb,.. -<W. n,.,;, fotu CDJ>IU. Add/~ ........,_., "" JYWne.

From:

Bqrant. David p.. .
LAS!' NAME, llRST;MIIlllLB IMT1AL

QHOi-016
RI!C. NO.

~·
l.lNIT

USP Coleman I
li<61TIVI10fl

Part A- ImfATE .RI!QUF.S1

\ M ~ a.a.\ \\'\(1~ ~
dJ,~UA.\\1./ w~r::.t>rcL"-6

\ ~<N.m1.c:.ldL VI -::,\IO'(Q" E~~h.

~~~<.XI ~~"' ~~·~ L"As L.'''l. \ 1\"N
t '1..rr. WYJ.\:k 1-o ~\7rd_'lr&. '!.rl~/

\e.\.a....,~ ~~~ch:fk..&-·~t:AI'61!> not-MNot..o<\. 04k- tl'l~:> ?«"<11i- ......_~ ~~\ -\-k cl~C'l..~~~O(\.. \ ~ CJ.;...H~ ~~~ 'N..\.ct. II\~ ':.~t:kl \{~'""& V.Jh\- ~~ ~~ \CI.«\M<.. "-'c..I::4Wl. ~ 7-.~( \ +<~wl ~ -tt.._rn 00 cit"*'-.-
~·~·

ue... ~-hpr;-c~x-·-t~~o kI~\DAr~u"~::~ .,li:~Y, ,\ ~tA 7iJ-~ .lrn\~-~a.s.1\1-\\tt',\n'.IT .~N....--kt~k\,?~tY~ cJ...lo~:~ o.dS U~-\e~~rCw;i=>\,.;=1hjr~':~6()--~1mI~ f(+~.\-..:),QU~_~P.e~J<;,':l-\,~'~.i=ltio"~-.nOC-~\ rz-...-r-o ?-....

Part B- RESPONSE

RCWFE810'10

1t:rr- ,_....., _ _ _..... _ _O/Jb_,._.,.of.. OATS
(/~---..----·-----·

WAllDBN OR RllGIONAL DIRECTOR

ORIGINAL: IIETUIINTOINMATI!

CASI! NUMBER: S/foZi -

Part C- RECEfPJ'

CASI! NUMBER:-------

Return to:

LAST NAME. FIRST. MIDDLE IMT1AL

Rl!G. NO.

INSTlTU110N

SUWECT: ______~------------------------------------------

DATil

RI!CIPIEm"S SIGNATUlle (STAPF MEMIIBR)

EXHIBIT 43
276

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 278 of 372 Page ID #:281

COC 1330.16.A January 16, 2008
Attachment A

INFORMAL RESOLUTION FORM

.

asNhBOalPTl-I9fCi.rEstATpsOreepsIeaNnratMtaeAnfToisrEsm:uemBouufsrcteoabnuecouersfnePdrinifsofoornremsacaPhlrloyigstsroaumest.aSftfaatenmd esntatff13sh3a0l.l13infroeqrmuiarlelsy

that ellcept as provided in 542.13(bl an inmate attempt to resolve the issue prior to submitting

l

•• * •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

INSTRUCTIONS: Counselors will complete submitted, if not informally resolved.

and

attach

this

form

to

each

Request

for

Administrative

Remedy

Fo

David Bryant Inmate Name

06704-016
Register No.

QtrsJUnit

I.

Specific complaint {one 8 W' x II" continuation page may be attached) :

I am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I have difficulty understanding

spoken English. I am unable to understand and enjoy television because the closed-captioning is not turned on.

I LN'*' ~t. Ctr!\ffi.Uf\\(fo.~ (l~ 00h.l)~( ~' ~'1~1<>/ 2.

What efforts have been made by the inmate to resolve the complaint informally? To whom has the inmate spoken?

3.

What action does the inmate wish to be taken to correct the issue?

That closed-captioning be enabled on a prison television available to me. As an alternative, a transfer to a prison

with other deaf inmates and with programs for the deaf.

anager's Review
w-J

Staff Circle One:
~Not Informally Resolved

Distribution by Correctional Counselor:

I. If complaint is informally resolved, maintain original on file in the Unit.

2. If complaint processing.

is

llil.l

informally

resolved,

attach

original

to

BP-9

Fonn

and

forward

to

Administrative

Remedy

Clerk

for

Date: Time: Counselor:

lnf. Resolution Form Issued to Inmate
\\ <-d I C>
1 01.:> b
$==::

lnf. Resolution Fonn Returned to
Counr'or
I -z..\ 1ID
13,tc
::6

BP-91ssued to Inmate

BP-9 Returned to Counselor

BP-9 Delivered to Admin Remedy Clerk

NYt2S28:416066.1

EXHIBIT 43 277

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 279 of 372 Page ID #:282

/
Response to Administrative Remedy Case Number: 57634f-F1
rTboeenhqispuFreeiossbgtrinrutaoarmerbymsep1eto0rdan, snf2oes0rf1teco0rlro,yesiondeudwtrohRcaiacenphqtiiunyoeosnsutiintturgfeotiqrosouAnedywsmotiutihanciotsaettnhlreaeevtriinvsdjeiooeynRatfeienimnleymevodiasuytireorasne.scvseiiegipwnteeinddg. .hinoYtuhosiusinoagflsfuiocneit
ATocHlnhnooeesuIrensoedivnffeotgchsraeetUip,gnutuaioinpttinio(otSsnnt.eHiylneUHotv)oou,iswryairoeorernvualesernarcg,bsoeeSemmHpfperrUoolnagmtiisnnr-amStwmrHaeemtUvreeeesbadbaaleefrcodieknrtngthcoolmaotgtsapepedendrenieoncrfraoaittlrtopeptpdiyooroopnteuguvlrrleaaipevtmilwioasmnicinoe,ginnmy.gopeurani·vtmtielIenalegytvehirssee.iqoSunpeewsctitiahl
wYdeiolla·unfroirset bqbeueienasgdtdfaord-erdstrrseaesndsseafedgraItnionAaidnnmtihninissitsirtteurastiptoivonenwsReiteh. moethdeyrCdaesaef iNnmo.a5te7s63a3n4d-Fp1roagnradm, tsheforer ftohree,
. ddPPBaiarasiysrssksoaewnftdirassoo,yfmi,neSSdoothWuuwetri,htfdhieBn.aautdthseiiilntsdog.Rinrtseegt,hgsy2piisoo0onu0rnear0sslr,eepO,Aqofytfnulioacseuenes-t,.tmaAf,oatGrty-nAe:aodpRrmpgeeiignaaiiosl3ntb0raya3l·t3fiDiv1liein-r6egR2cae2tom6Br,,ePw3d-8iDyt0hIiRs0in-C1tDw0aEemtNnopItyEthCD(er2.e0BeI)ukfcyreaoalueunaodreef r

6}'

Date

EXHIBIT 43 278

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 280 of 372 Page ID #:283

ll.'-;.lh'l>artnu:nt nf,lu..,tirt•

Regional1\dministrative Remedy Appeal

(;l,1-LL/- C\ l} "3--\l\

rcu; 'Hl

U'<IT

Part A- RE.\SON FOI{ .\f'PEAL

I ?..K\ a_ J__Q..-. J Ill~ ~....::J<~~ v..:.::...c.·" +k ~~t?..c:~u-.... ~ \\e,_-:t..c,~ ]'.._tete~ IY\~ r<+u'* ~

~ ~k0M\~C~~dCdi.rs\.vHll.:\V~,.~·wQrc_bv((Jn2.".x.~\1..1.f\..)\t.C...c:1..~~:.n1:S;':\~C.+*cA-\T(x:NhR1?..rc-sWu2l.(\t'{){;f2S.\\\C-1,ebr.\\rs;t(~tk,,G;~i,.'I~.dt.-A1"2lW9~"(u'~J'Wl.).\",.\d'O'.J-.~tf·:'1¥;l<'\·\\\\...::tOe\zrd.tc\-.-nJ~ml<.cde".tdt?'·\\.i~·)\-.?v~iJ:,tfu'\_.-tc\_\2.~.\;L~dRUC'1srcN~..2k2..'u.1b.11e.2?LBd:.-:::~(,W'\1?\~0srf-+\\e~4-J-u5..''.:\.l•,J:+<:.:J\..k~._Q~sIw3\oz.AMS3,..f\v\=.l4.e/('zn'.9-_d.)-bF:-'f:ut,\Jt!_i_-l:L.f-)_tYt:,iu\..V.nLbil>.crIL21tTb.xC?t\J.:.:.'.-c,O.\.\.t\.f4((."e'tJ\.(l::zIde.~><:r>\..'S*<pS.~.o:l~;J0,l'~--·cAVxJ-d.afk.'.--r.n0.\t.(>r.t,ny..+Sb-Lkl4\J'_kc-,_ttrko[-o\+etl{o~ea\t,Jt

D.\ TE Part H- RESPONSE

J!s~a[J·.JieJ REGIO~AL D.\TE

dI~f~ys

of the

\\Jth ti<.tlt" nf

rrhhis,s.

rc-"ponsc.
rnplllbC".

ynu

may

.rpp<'Jl

!u

the

Gcnc:rJI

C{)unseL

Yuur

;:tppeul

must

be

reCLJ\ed

til

!he-

CienerJI

Coun-;Dd"IcR, EOCtttOleRe Within

.10

calcrH..I.tr

7:7/ ~ /JI'LY~-/\ ORIGINAL: RETURN TO
--------Part C ·RECEIPT

INMATE ---

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

CASENUI\1RER: ------

/' rJL'/.,r/// ------

-

-

CASE NUMBER: - - - - - - - - - -

I~N~S~T~IT~U~T~IO~"'~- Retur
Sli

n to: BJ

-I C ---f;·--:---;U-:-.-S-;!'-:N-:A--M-:E--.:-F--IR:-S--T~.-:~-l:i-:D-:O!----E:-l'--II:TR -IA-FL----·-C --_­

-

'

_

:

'

-

<

_

(

_

)

. _

_

_

_

_

_

_l_'N_l_T_

_

_

_

_

_

USP LVN

D-\TE

SJC;NAfURE. RLCIPIEN r OF RE-JiiOI\.\1 . .-\PPFAI.
EXHIBIT 43 279

BP·230( 13) JUNE 2002

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 281 of 372 Page ID #:284

t.;,. PEP\RT\IE!'IT Of Jt.:SI!Cic

REQlJEST FOR AO:\IINISTRATlVE REMEHY

From: ----~!'_yant.L....Q.?Vig___Q_<:___ _
L\ST 'OAME, PIRST. ~IIDHLF: I"<JTJAL
l'art A- 1,.....-:\IATE REQUEST

__Q6 7 0 4...:Ql_6-
Rf..(;. NO.
--:>'). l _,\

UMT

USP Coleman I
1:'\STITl TION

• .<-k_, ·'~C ,·.;,~.._\._ tc::· \_:;._,.,_ }"' "\ I.:I:I\2c.\-1'/ _.,[!.}... '"·It ,r.l'~'t*ls ·,;x_c.J.'-''~tt;x. 1:><-*·'"':. .:.u: c'> \/...::."'

J., .
. j
:P...- '-I-to 11.1 rr. Part B- RESPONSE

RCfJD FEB 10 '10

!l•l IE

W.\f{IJFN UR REGfUN.\1 JliRFr TOR

J{di,\>illtrfh•d ~o·tlh thn rl'.\f!lln'ie, rou nun uppt>ill Jo che Ref(ion~l /Jirf!ctor. Your appeal rmnt be recrin·d in lht' Regiomll Oflia w.ilhin 20 calendar rla_v.:; 1tj the dau 1/f. t,~., rt' 'j!Jtll::J't!.

OKICJ"' \L: RETCR!'I TO lN\1\IT

_S C\SF '<UMBFR:

l5_(f:lf:"j~

1
r),

l'art C- I<Et'EIPT

1\dnrn to

L.·\'>T 'i·\~11:. fIRST \IIDOL!: l'i!Tf \I

HHi :'\(i

IJNIT

f\\lf·

_ __ !PIL'<T'S '-1'1 RL ·:;l'\H \tf·\IBFRi ~·----~------·-·-

'~I·<

',1\;'-;

. ---·-·-~-~----- -~_,

EXHIBIT 43
280

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 282 of 372 Page ID #:285

COC 1330.16.A January 16, 2008
Attachment A

INFORMAL RESOLUTION FORM

NOTICE TO INMATE: Bureau of Prisons Program Statement 1330.13 requires shall first present an issue of concern informally to staff and staff shall informally a BP-9. A separate form must be used for each issue.

that except attempt to

as provided in 542.13(b} an inmate resolve the issue prior to submiuing

* •• * ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

S\r\ \_.\. INSTRUCTIONS: Counselors will
submitted, if not informally resolved.

complete

and

attach

this

form

to

each

Request

for

Administrative

Remedy ~ •

Formp;j·9} , {)

David Bryant

06704-016

D()~

Inmate Name

Register No.

QtrsJUnit

-:>ln-ma'--te-S""i;:;..g_na""tu-=re

I.

Specific complaint (one 8 W' x I I" continuation page may be attached):

I am a deaf inmate, who uses the assistance of a hearing aid. The prison, however, has failed to give me batteries
m f u for my hearing aid. =""Th,us ~( \ 'Ne.\J f. oo\'} rt c_q \\/~<i. 'ci).;l-\{ <" ::,

s \ ~fD<'O "S\]. L .

k:~J!%Z:t>~*~£t ~~~ir\i:~ 2.

~~Uha~~ nef~ the inmate to resolve the complaint informally? To whom has the inmate spoken?

3.

What acti.on does the .mmate Wl.Sh to be taken to correct the 1. ssue?

b~\ \ '

s The prison should give me batteries for my hearing aid as they are needed. J}..g,. 'c)...-! K( 1<? {\RQcl -tD'-9A. ~~c:,~c.. £si N.'H\'M>~ -;l\ds ) f%· o;;,t=¥ \3 ex ";:UJ( vi]-S.

G. DIIHN
Correctional6JlWlfftlJR

Staff Circle One:
~Not Informally Resolved

Distribution by Correctional Counselor:

I. If complaint is infonnally resolved, maintain original on file in the Unit.

2. If complaint processing.

is

!!Qi

informally

resolved,

attach

original

to

BP-9

Form

and

forward

to

Administrative

Remedy

Clerk

for

lnf. Resolution Form Issued to Inmate

lnf. Resolution Form Returned to Counselor

BP-9 Issued to Inmate

BP-9 Returned to Counselor

BP-9 Delivered to Admin Remedy Clerk

Date: \\zA \ \t> t \"11 \to

Time:

fbOD

Counselor:

NY12528:416058.1

EXHIBIT 43 281

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 283 of 372 Page ID #:286
Response to Administrative Remedy Case No: 575644-F2 This is in response to your Request for Administrative Remedy received in this office on Februaty 10, 2010, in which you claim you have not received batteries for your hearlng aids. You allege the batteries you have are not the right size for your hearing aids. Investigation into this matter revealed you received two pairs of size 13 hearing aids batteries as scheduled. According to manufacture specifications these type of batteries last six months with normal regular use. You will continue to have your batteries changed as scheduled by your medical provider. Your next scheduled batteries exchange is scheduled for April 10, 2010.
Accordingly, this response is for Informational Purposes Only. !f you are dissatisfied
wtth this response. you may appeaf by filing a BP-10 to the BUREAU OF PRISONS, SOUTHEAST REGIONAL OFFICE, ATTN: REGIONAL DIRECTOR, 3800 Camp Creek Parkway, SW, Building 2000, Atlanta, GA 30331-6226, within 20 calendar days from the date of this response.
Date
---
EXHIBIT 43
282

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 284 of 372 Page ID #:287
EXHIBIT 44

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 285 of 372 Page ID #:288

l .S. fh·partmt_'IH nf Ju..,tit'e

Regional Administrative Remedy Appeal

Part \- REMiON FOR APPEAL
my JM1SAii1i.\\!fL6''SOJ·.nUl'\It.iA;G£k..J\Hl1.\AnA~-.EA+.L."f~\I'S~Au::~}.J(c:1p~8~,ciel'rt.\tte,"z.?__z~.>tff~iE?\\.'&.J./1t'}:.\.l.\.,tn.fr.r/lJt~\v.'<.A-u.tJ~i-k.-v..t..6:..<.~En~ .s".~:bP'nI'~J~~~~Wt\~\'~1v~'s6efX(..\P\.N~~~~.Ae...:;:f2:<.j\.L-..t...\,\.;..CrQl£l*.i(-lle--.\?ttfl)f\l..r'..\Q:)~~h:."::_'1e.:i4-\\'l)•c~Jp.U(~'r!.t..;raJt)'db,o..~_\u_>~t<vksT~\cv,ta.t-.~l.(fpl~o\taUlt.;>d-Ji.Nr.(~lrLf<\hln:f-?tfl>'r~.dttiJ<ft.\'(..t__L.\.t.y"<1:\~f.fAMO_s'k.~.t.(lj\tl-\\~;p0._,Mfo.7.l·'<:l~r>u~:+dd~v.".e-"Y'_"":tfx'.<\&Lzlch~cl:ff<«Vi('tL<C:f1.\:..ty,L:~.::'u.iSS<.fV.1d.~btufJ~li(.t'e,lCi'.\v"ic.i.,'+ft:;o.'l..fAl:.1ca->\Q.C<rQ(-l~?~h{J("·I..,'.S-.<:td1l:_i.ds.~:d"J\t<'l·.0,dkr~t~b,
\;)tQJ\ reJ'Nd,., .lid ,
I \ o ::-/.-_-_--;--- ·- ~ «==.JJv·--=~<t- Ce~..<1.'<\\..~ A:~'J:.i(rY,\\td~ft?le·.'~}1.r\1<~J"~.'_7If:tb\>'t.d.r'vU'tQ.j'.o.~(~)\\AJ('\.I\..lo'cyS.h.p_.',I)cJu\_.'Jhf)..z~uy~.{~Qneu:~r:l~,\:?(.:\lhI-ww.l1\i:&'y:J-(~~AL"0~c:et"r(.n";1c.-n(5"f1l5~t'~t<iQ,~;-3:c..._"<.-Z~/f.r.S.·v-.~t:F.rRAf.rsv1tdtr~lu5,1A_~~ t...J..pIcrJ?'?X;of:~\t>~~(<1(\11F1~\(b\-/1.Q~ -1(~ X..~)~13~ t>&3e=i0l-l1~--F:Ft:1~ />.I1.:_/M-df~ksrsz12t7.LAJ:.2stoss(,!I?~\I1-f\'<\P/'F{"?'L-R.1b~..~./.l .<.N~:e:<,·er-_..s [)Ail SltiNAfURE OF RFt)UES1ER Part B - RESPONSE
!
,·
" ~ -'-

If diss,t.!t,fted \'-''it h. d.1y:-- 11t thl' J.nc ut

thts rc'>pnns~. rh1s re~ron;e.

yuu

may

appeal

to

the

( Jc>nt'ral

Coun.-.el.

Your

<~ppt:>;J!

must

be

re ..:CIIit'd

in

the

REGIONAL DIRECTOR General Cnunsel'-, Off11.:e \\ ttl1ln

.~0

ctknJ~u

OR~.~~K~.~ETUR~T2I.:::..MAT!o - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - CASENUMl:IER_--.-------
l'art C ·RECEIPT

CASE NUMBER: - - - - - - - - -

Rdurn t o : - -L-AS-r N-A.\- !E.-FIR-S L-\11-DD-LE-IN- I'f I- AL - - -

REli. NO.

11N!T

INS I If l liON

SUBJECT------------------------------------------

USP LVN

DME

SIGNATURE, RECIPIENT OF REG!ON:\L .>.PPEA!.
EXHIBIT 44

BP·230i 13) JUNE 2002

284

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 286 of 372 Page ID #:289

•

REJECTION NOTICE - ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

DATE: MARCH 15, 2010

FROM: TO

~~;I ASODUMTIH.IESATSRTATRIEVGEIONRAEML EDOYFFCICOEORDINATOR

DAVID BRYANT, 06704-016

COLEMAN I USP

UNT: L/M

P.O. BOX 1023

COLEMAN, FL 33521

QTR: Z01-103UAD

FOR IS
OF

THE BEING
THIS

REASONS LISTED BELOW, REJECTED AND RETURNED
NOTICE WITH ANY FUTURE

THIS REGIONAL APPEAL TCOORYROESUP. ONYDOUENCSHEOURLEDGARINDCINLGUDETHEA

COPY REJECTION.

REMEDY ID DATE RECEIVED SUBJECT 1 SUBJECT 2 INCIDENT RPT NO:

576334-R1 MARCH 15, 2 010

REGIONAL APPEAL

OTRTHAENRSFENRON--MOATIHL ERCOMMUNICATION

REJECT

REASON

1:

OTYFRHOILAUENINRCAOAINIDESSEEENPINATMRCOAIRRDTEEEPENOTRHTRTAENRQYEUOPOEOUNSRETTW/AAISPN(SPTINUECAEA/ILDRDDEEFRLNOEARTSTSEEENDADUC.MHIBSESURUN)ER. EOLARTYEOADUPPEMISAUSLSUTEMORE

REJECT

REASON

2:

YOU MAY 10 DAYS

RESUBMIT YOUR OF THE DATE OF

APPEAL THIS

IN PROPER REJECTION

FORM WITHIN NOTICE.

EXHIBIT44 285

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 287 of 372 Page ID #:290
EXHIBIT 45

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 288 of 372 Page ID #:291

SULLIVAN & CROMWELL LLP
TELEPHONE: 1-212·558·4000 FACSIMILE: 1-212-558·3588
WWW. SULLCROM .COM

125f!l3~~
d~ o/M<ic> •./fC:VIOOOII-.U.98
LOS ANGELES • PALO ALTO • WA'!I-fiNGTON. o.C FRANKFURT • LONDON • PARI$ 8EUING • HONG KONG • TOKYO M£LitOU~NE • S'I'Df'I£Y

March 22, 2010
Via U.S. Mail
Warden Joseph L. Norwood USP VICTORVILLE U.S. PENITENTIARY P.O. BOX 5400 ADELANTO, CA 92301
Re: Request for Accommodation to Administrative Remedy Process for Inmate David Bryant, 06704-016
Dear Warden Norwood:
Recently, David Bryant, Register Number 06704-016, was transferred to USP Victorville from USP Coleman L As I am sure you are aware, Mr. Bryant is deaf. He communicates in American Sign Language ("ASL") and, therefore, does not communicate effectively in written or spoken English.
I, in conjunction with three of my associates and the Washington Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs, have been retained by Mr. Bryant to enforce his rights under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, including, but not limited to, the rights of reasonable accommodation for his disability and effective communication. Mr. Bryant should be provided the following accommodations at USP Victorville (to the extent they have not already been provided):
1. Access to a working teletypewriter ("TTY") or videophone. Mr. Bryant cannot communicate effectively using a regular telephone. He needs regular access to a working TTY or videophone to communicate with anyone outside the prison, including family members and his attorneys.
2. Working hearing aid batteries. Mr. Bryant uses hearing aids that allow him to hear some sound and as a result communicate more effectively.
EXHIBIT 45
287

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 289 of 372 Page ID #:292

Warden Joseph L. Norwood

-2-

However, in order for the hearing aids to be of any assistance, he must be provided working batteries. At USP Coleman I, Mr. Bryant was not provided working hearing aid batteries for months at a time and as a result his hearing aids often could not function or function properly. 3. Access to closed-captioned television. USPs Hazelton and Coleman I had televisions equipped with closed-captioning, but the other prisoners prevented Mr. Bryant from using it. In at least one instance, Mr. Bryant was prevented from using the closed-captioning by means of physical violence. Mr. Bryant should be given access to closedcaptioning and protected from violence when granted such access. 4. A qualified ASL interpreter to enable him to communicate with COs, medical staff, mental healthcare workers, pharmacists, educational and vocational instructors, and work supervisors. Mr. Bryant cannot effectively write or communicate in English. Mr. Bryant's day-to-day interactions with members of the prison staff cannot be effectively reduced to writing and, without an ASL interpreter, Mr. Bryant cannot take advantage of the services to which he is entitled. 5. A vibrating pager to alert him to prison alarms and other announcements. Mr. Bryant cannot hear alarms, verbal safety warnings, and other announcements possibly subjecting him to physical danger. A vibrating pager would alert Mr. Bryant to these auditory warnings and announcements. Mr. Bryant sought similar accommodations from both USP Hazelton and USP Coleman I. Mr. Bryant was working through the administrative remedy process at each prison, but was transferred before he could complete the process. Currently, Mr. Bryant is awaiting responses to three BP-lOs he filed on March 12. I also request that as per your obligations under § 1O(b) of the Rehabilitation Act and Program Statement ("PS") 1330.16, Mr. Bryant be given the reasonable accommodation of having a copy of any communications from you or any other employee of the Bureau of Prisons to him also be sent to me, his counsel, via email or facsimile. Additionally, I request that a copy of the USP Victorville's Institutional Supplement be sent to me. Alternatively, USP Victorville could hire a qualified ASL interpreter to assist Mr. Bryant in reviewing any communications he receives from you or other employees of the Bureau ofPrisons-including responses to his administrative remedies, understanding the relevant portion ofPS 1330.16, and completing any subsequent forms

EXHIBIT 45 288

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 290 of 372 Page ID #:293

Warden Joseph L. Norwood

-3-

he must submit--or to assist Mr. Bryant in communications related to any medical care or treatment he may require.
I am available by telephone, (212) 558-1632, email, fitzwaterm@sullcrom.com, or facsimile, (212) 291-9282, at any time to discuss the underlying issue of Mr. Bryant's need for accommodations so that we may resolve these issues.
Respectfully yours,
M/~ew~S~&ater
cc: BOP Associate Gen. Counsel Paul W. Layer Office of General Counsel 320 1st Street, NW 7th Floor Washington, DC 20534
Harlan Penn, Regional Counsel Western Regional Office 7338 Shoreline Drive Stockton, CA 95219

EXHIBIT 45
289

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 291 of 372 Page ID #:294
EXHIBIT 46

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 292 of 372 Page ID #:295

U.S. OEPARTME~T OF .ll:S'I ICE Federal Bure:Ju of Pri ..nn~

IU:QUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

From: ~yant, David D. ·------- 06704-016

LAST ~A,\IE. FIRST, :\II()OLE INITIAL

RE<;. NO.

t''IIT

1:'1/STlTllT!ON

Part 8- RESPONSE

c:t:
(10)>

=r--..J
=

., :>. -~,

<c· :::0 ':,

.....n- rz

,..)

U1 ,'Tj

,, OUl
~0

-,

-.c::

<-n :X

;:=-n r-()

~

0

,.,I"Tl 0

1..0

D,\ rE

WARDEN OR REGIONAL DIRECTOR

I( di>Wiri>fieJ •'iti!tili• Ol{h;J:'Ii,\L: RE
--------

rr<ponse, ''"" may appeal
fl'I{N TO II'<~IATE
---------

Ill
-

tile Ne~ional Oirntor,
--------

Your appeal mu>l be rPai••d in
-----------

1M Re~:ional.Office
CASE
-------

K'ithin 10 ~ale"}Er day:fl'::.!:/7"
NUMBER::l._QS.._..._l.f!t-'-~-F'i[--'...._....__.,..=-
------------------

Part C- RECEIPT

C'\SE NIJ\1BFR: ------· ----·-

f{LltJrn In:

I A'il' 1-iA\lF. 1-tf<ST, \IlDDLE 1:-;ITIAL

RFG \10

I'~IT

I NSTITUTI< l:'ll

'>L'HIH: r, _ - - · - - - - - · - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

I•~TF

kH, lf'JH.; I' S )IGNA J'llf<E IS I' \I--F ,\!E\1HFRl

_-1P-!2(~ 1 1)
1PPil 1 ':tr;2

EXHIBIT 46 291

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 293 of 372 Page ID #:296
EXHIBIT 47

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 294 of 372 Page ID #:297

U.S. Departtnent or Justice
Federal Bureau of Prisons

Central Office Administrative Remedy Appeal

Type or use ball-pomt pen. If attachments are needed. submit four copies

ments must be submiLted wtlh this appeal.

From

D'') .4'7<dj •

LAST NAME. FJRST. MIDDLE INITlAL

One copy each of the completed BP-2291 131 and BP-230113), mcludmg any attach·

REG. NO.

~__"'-'1{J L -'.c'fr.-,,f/(

UNIT

INSTITIJTION

Part 8 · RESPONSE

DATE

GENERAL COUNSEL

ORIGINAL: RETURN TO INMATE Part C . RECEIPT

CASE NUMBER: - - - - - - - - - CASENUMBER: -----------------

Return to: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - SUBJECT _ _ _ _ _LA_ ST_NA_ME_. F_IRS_T._ MI_ DD_ LE_IN_ ITIA_L_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _RE_ G. _ NO_ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _U_ NIT_ _ _ _ _ _ _IN_ST_ ITI_ JTI_ ON__

DATE

~---

SIGNATURE OF RECIPIE!'.'T OF CENTRAL OFFICE APPEAL
EXHIBIT 47
293

BP-231{131

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 295 of 372 Page ID #:298

l .S. Ih.·partllH'Hl of Jusrin·

Regional Administrative Remedy Appeal

l'art .\- RE,\SON FOR APPEAL

\ M ?-._ill;;:~ '"~.uo\.
sfOIL.t" E~kh, 1\\'{ r~v.<sb

~~1'1'\Jv-1\\<-* '" AM.t 1\u..·• ~ X\ Ac:L 1n-tfr\)fe:t.( to

s~ ~_;v.,~C"A~.-'\ \luve clt~u<.lt'f·;..I'Qlu:::.I:-.J'd.'"\-
N-lp fNL LMf\.M-1\I<-~ v.:o.\h C:.t-:,) fl\.tcl•c...?-1 :s\<..~"

](IM<1~1\I.1:L\>\ftOll'-•l;l)t_~<lmi~~-A~';+';'\~."?-J~~.~lC~~:Jt>~-tl..r'ed~_D.'.1?J)~~:t:A/.IV'~d-tt.4_1'~_.:o:,n.Bc).tP~tt\<~t?1.-_":.(:>:_.:\\1.'.r'_\v"J..~P.-\~J\J")<:eP:?.:-l:ryu>>:;e)J, .r<t..~.-:.r;~.tlil....c<.lJS.~.<)<c':.d.r;x.Z.t(\;\2~;.p..-"~rid.or~.Jp..~.<t\1k./tcla{[tri.<..~r<t.:S.;d\>J.rJ~t~hI~O-?~fr~~\vL{yt.dttf(:ra:..kr0,..p..,1.g•,f6:;ifxw-.:<>}R\.~_r"7'\u-.tZfHo&vcm'<e"\"..2(.J1.>\'~ycft:{..(C,;'\_Vv:lq\.llJ:f.''•ul'i:.f:>:f,"fC-'tQ''--((f-"''h-:-<>'0:.C.h:.d>.<d;<l"<-<'.4:t}.rkb

~ IQ.i\~\.W .

u.t,.:-r.'\.~ ~"p-:z=.xs-:\.:.:d,Ae\.:~~~tUfh\'t:r'\>l tO,tA"u.l-'.:y)'.h;?.1d1C\1J'f:J';ez.K..IlY~{\ce7u-uil·:o:±IJw~e1t~y..~A0~..ei.<.'".n_-.l,os(\t<t~d:_t.><ch:c.~--W-t.ol.f&t_:M:.R~A(:r'Jur.ob.~.'il~ .i.-p"''-''"itC\.(>}1.'{'0l~\.ti...2t.(\4- ~~t~ Sn3lJ4;-:\FeI"l.Jb.:.+.-dtk*s'.r:,z:-.Lt~il~~tslf?m\1f\Jy'P\Q".)'.R.~_--'"1-9I.A.._}~e:_,c';·_(:.,

I \ ____. . ('\ k- Ad--11\ull"jta._hvQ..~~'{ 0.~\\u.rr·--~'> 51~,c?.;~S-F/ 1 51i...,3'"')~ FI,.!JtG.-'01-Fi?rd- 5{::;')'8- F/.

-:> .-:->

'II

d.u\0

:l.__.;,;£?~~if"-I

D-'IE

SI(;N.->:fURE OF Rf.()LIES1ER

Part B - RESI'ONSE

;r---.. __

- ,'' ;.._ ...._
.. J

DArE

REGIONAL DIRECTOR

II di':.~'~tJ..,fiL'J \\'JI)~ th~:-. rc:"..,pnn,.:, )l)U tn,1y appe.d In the ()c-'nt>ral Cutllhel. Ynur appt'Jl rnusl b~ rcct~Jved 111 the General CPunse-1·.-. Office \\lthtn 3() c.dentlar

d,1y-. 111 lhL· tLIIc u! tht::. re'::.ron-,e.

Ol'aRrItCC OI~ KAR I.. E REC TUE RNITP O ~ IN- M - Yff- : ------------------C- ASE-N- UM- BE- R:-------- -- -- -- -- -- -

CASE NUMBER:

Rcturn tu: - - - - - : - - - : - - - - - - - - - - - - 1..\ST N.\;,JE. FIRST \1l0DL!c INI'l IAL

Ktti. NO.

I'NIT

IN'-.TIII TION

~UHJE<'T - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

USP LVN

[).\If:

SIGNATURE. RECIPIENT OF REGIONAL APPEAL

BP-:230\ 13) JUNE 2002

EXHIBIT 47

294

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 296 of 372 Page ID #:299
125 BROAD STREET NEW YORK, N.Y. 10004-2498
February25, 2010
Via email and U.S. Mail Warden Scott A. Middlebrooks USP Coleman I U.S. Penitentiary P.O. Box 1023 Coleman, FL 33521 coa/publicinformation@bop.gov
Re: Responses to Requests for Administrative Remedy Inmate David Bryant, 06704-016
Dear Warden Middlebrooks: I am in receipt of your February 11, 2010 Responses to Administrative
Remedy for Case Numbers 576335-Fl 1, 576336-F1 2, 57337-F1 3 and 57338-Fl 4 and write to clarify those Responses and the Administrative Remedy Appeals process.
In Request for Administrative Remedy Case Number 576335-Fl, Mr. Bryant requests an American Sign Language ("ASL") interpreter for work programs in order to understand and communicate with work managers and coordinators, or alternatively, a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and programs for the deaf. In Request for Administrative Remedy Case Number 576336-Fl, Mr. Bryant requests an ASL interpreter to help him communicate with medical staff and healthcare providers, including mental healthcare professionals and pharmacists, or alternatively, a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and programs for the deaf. In Request for Administrative Remedy Case Number 576337-Fl, Mr. Bryant requests an ASL interpreter for education programs and vocational programs in order to understand and communicate effectively with the instructors and other students, or alternatively, a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and programs for the deaf.
EXHIBIT 47
295

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 297 of 372 Page ID #:300

Warden Middlebrooks -2-
As I understand it, you have consolidated the above referenced Requests for Administrative Remedy with Request for Administrative Remedy Case Number 576344-F1 and will respond to the consolidated Request for Administrative Remedy by March 2, 2010. At that time, ifMr. Bryant is unsatisfied with your Response, he may appeal the Response for the consolidated Administrative Remedy to the Bureau of Prisons' Southeast Regional Office. Any appeal of the consolidated Administrative Remedy will necessarily encompass Mr. Bryant's Requests for Administrative Remedy Case Numbers 576335-F1, 576336-Fl, 57337-F1 and 57338-Fl.
I am available by telephone, (212) 558-1632, email, fitzwaterm@sullcrom.com, or facsimile, (212) 291-9282, at any time to discuss the underlying issue ofMr. Bryant's need for effective communication and accommodations or to discuss the specific issues raised in this letter.
Respectfully yours,

cc:

Lisa M. Sunderman, Regional Counsel

Southeast Regional Office

Federal Bureau ofPrisons

3800 Camp Creek Parkway

Building 2000

Atlanta, GA 30331

Jeff Campbell, Legal Counsel USP Coleman I U.S. Penitentiary P.O. Box 1023 Coleman, FL 33521 j4campbell@bop.gov

4

In Request for Administrative Remedy Case Number 576337-Fl, Mr. Bryant requests the prison

to install strobes or vibrating alarms or provide him with a vibrating pager. Alternatively, Mr.

Bryant requests a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and programs for the deaf.

EXHIBIT 47
296

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 298 of 372 Page ID #:301

''/.~ 'i'"fl'I{;.('<J 1'~/'-0'I'~l•t ,~;;,~, " ~~I •.·.\! •1-IIH lo.o ~-..." '-'
REQl:f~~T FOR \f}~fi:-IISTRATIVE Rnll·:nv

P:rrt \- 1:\~JAT£ RH}CEST
:r ·' '<1 ;\. ;tV-\: ,., ".-.\(._

__Q.§.1.0.1:-Q1.L_
ttf:t;, ......

USP Coleman I
I"S1TH·r!llN

s ,4""''"'1 it« r~···

fP"7.

¥ fk'• - fr~41t.A1<, 1

,(.\,,_," ,'vt.L'*....--:..

r .l-

<.:_,.-.,i\,.....,....,+

""" (.~......... ..... ...::. ~~" l{ <""- ·P-~

c..tt. "-''J. f,."U.v('> ·tt~ l,,..,~u

~'rs

.... is ,.,.~"'"' h ~"'-<- t-"*~"~ ~

"""Aq._;.,._.,.~

,:.~...( pro:J . ,--,{~ .,...,.

2-
RCVOFEB 10'10

1/ di\H11H[rrd \Ffh dt(' t';'1po~~t> \.'JI# HttH'lt1t(t<"<li Itt !/te .¥,·t:_irtnrtl Hirt->'tar l'rw.r appl'ni mw<l hr n~·dl'r""d lrt rit.f' !(,•tti•nwl 0Jfiu within lfJ ot/.l'ndnr ~y~ :·ifdt':.,Jhif.f ,Jf tht• ~"p.&"')ll'<~..'.

•iR!CI:><\II<FI! IC'i HI 1"''1 \fE

C,\'ic :>liJMf\1 R _6ll.Q_;))_ct::::J::L.

l':trt C- RE!'fdi'T
I \'iT 'C \~11. fiR>T \lflliJI [' l:'<ffl.\1.

EXHIBIT 47 297

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 299 of 372 Page ID #:302

COC 1330.16.A January 16, 2008
Attachment A

INFORMAL RESOLUTION FORM

NOTICE TO INMATE: Bureau of Prisons Program Statement 1330.13 requires that except as provided in 542.13(b) an inmate
shall first present an issue of concern informally to staff and staff shall informally attempt to resolve the issue prior to submiUing a BP-9. A separate form must be used for each issue.
••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

INSTRUCTIONS: Counselors will complete and attach this form to each Request for Admmtstrative D f i lFoe m-e9) d y

submiued, tf not informally resolved.

.

David Bryant

06704-016

Inmate Name

Register No.

Qtrs.IUnit

Inmate Stgnature

1.

Specific complaint (one 8 W' x II" continuation page may be auached) :

[ am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I cannot understand or communicate

effectively with people who do not know ASL. I am unable to understand or communicate effectively with the

prison's

. Among other problems, this means that I cannot hear calls for line-up.

-2.

What efforts have been made by the inmate to resolve the complaint informa!Jy? To whom has the inmate spoken?

3.

What action does the inmate wish to be taken to corr~the issue?

sliiiili ASL interpreter for communications with the prison's

and a vibrating pager for calls to line-up and other

routine announcements. That the prison's~ who knows ASL be assigned to my unit as much as possible. As

an alternative, a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and programs for the deaf.

OUMM Correctional Counselir (OUHSUOR

Staff Circle One:
~

NotlnCormally Resolved

Distribution by Correctional Counselor:

!. If complaint is informally resolved, maintain original on file in the Unit.

2. If complaint is nQ! informally resolved, attach original to BP-9 Form and forward to Administrative Remedy Clerk for processing.

Date: Time: Counselor:

lnf. Resolution Form Issued to Inmate
1~21\1\)
1 1:)<.) 0
%L:=:

lnf. Resolution Form Returned to
Counselor ~
ll2<1 tt:>
12-.0 0
===-z-c-

BP-9 Issued
to Inmate

BP-9 Returned to Counselor

BP-9 Delivered to Admin Remedy Clerk

NY 12528:416fJ7l.l

EXHIBIT 47
298

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 300 of 372 Page ID #:303
Response to AdministratiVe Remedy Case Number. 576334-F1
This is in response to your Request for Administrative Remedy receipted in this office on February 10, 2010, in which you request staff trained in American Sign Language (ASL) be assigned to your housing unit. In addition, you request to be provided with a vibrating pager to notify you of count time or a transfer to a facility housing hearing impaired inmates. Investigation of this matter revealed at the present time, there are no provisions in policy to provide hearing impaired inmates with pagers or ASL trained staff. However, you are provided with a hearing aid and new batteries for the deVice as needed. While you maintain a vibrating pager is necessary to notify you of count time, you have never
failed to be present or stand for count, as evidenced by your lack of disciplinary history
for failure to stand count: In regard to your request for a transfer. hearing impaired inmates maintain the same care level as sight impaired inmates, and thus, are housed in Care Level1-2 facilities, as no specialiZed program is currently in place. Accordingly, your request is Denied. If you are dissatisfied with this response, you may appeal by filing a BP-DIR-1 0 to the Bureau of Prisons, Southeast Regional Office, Attn: Regional Director, 3800 Camp Creek Parkway, SW, Building 2000. Atlanta, Georgia 30331--6226, within twenty {20) calender days from the date of this response.
Date
EXHIBIT 47 299

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 301 of 372 Page ID #:304

l .S. DEPART:\1E:>T OF Jl:Sl'lCE

REQliEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

From:--···-· Bryant, David D. L.\ST NAME. HRST. ~110DLE 11\ITIAI.

06704-016
RH~ ..'10.

llSP...C.o.leman I
r:-.srJTLTION

Part A- INMATE RE<..)LEST

3,0-\ \ '~~i.-J.:..

t~\\\\\\t'~,L{.:f.,_ \,'2-.(i'\,~'\'\.k-l...\\·-:~ ~;\<~c-\\.\

-I~.,~~~

.
<.._-....

1

J'_),.-\

L;.,._

., ·~.<-l·\'~L'\
\)L- j

\:~l.····c\c _:.;Jc,}i)<vJ.._

'J\ :'.i-~"(1\.l'->'''"-""'- ~.\4>c..~\\,.,•_\\j ;:,.,.,,\'""\'<-'-"-\'(',cU., I'C~ \L.\'CL<; ~':oL 1.'"'\ul.,_.t,.l.( n.; 1)',':'\(..\);.rt:,

?' . '(.~t~_-,f' (!1,__.(1\. lt\ 't.\I...~
l ' · · . \ ' · · .. \:.. \: '•· · '~')0<\c f1Yk')·~-:::,

:~y.,-\. ·~:::,

\_~"--·b.,.,'--'\"{.",'-.' .-J)1·r.,_j~f\...:• :.::.

·,·.·~ • /. \ )'<'.. 1~.), ;,__-.. ·....,;__

;

,~

.

-

,

_

<
J

.

l

·

1

:

u

J

.

(

.

t\)

.:.: ot (:<:t;,~:i\,·, ;J..c~·_,. 1 ,0:::.:o ,c1. ).I c·t·.-'u<. .~t".J ·'.e:<-

">•'""'·L,. ·..l.i~;u ':-11,.•·" i .Y·

--"1 \J'-

'

--"""

-

1

,,_,_'-'
..._ .\.,.._

~ ~ ~~~-~

,..,.

\

;ui''C .... ,._

I "''··'~ ·.,,-::.~_.,'*

(
\.-)~~

f,""'' · J , ~ ~j)LL\~ MC1.:u'o.i"~ uq,, 9'-'-" 1\;:::,.l.;- \)..<..;.._biz.\~ 1~\\

r~
l

~..:>H·Ll' •\J )<'V·--, -:\'~,h_._,,'-''<..v;--

1..

~

~

Ct.;._\ '1\-<_. ~ •.J0'(_ ,;c.y"l'~~\iN:tl:' \

('t\.:7·v.J-
k ~(Y',

•J

tt:_~. .-Hcl.. I \ "'-\k:?.li\v~_\,1

">-\'\ \\ 1<0c0...-1..
~~~''''l\).~11t<,.J.c.

\.N 1\:-\, •,(,(.:;('<-- .~, "''' ~~"} \',:, J.rv( C.Oc>\J_, n~L.'Vx ', (_.c.ttl.'c'j'+ .\1.'-.. k'SL. ••\\:<'<yi U":-.

~x

~:.J!....

( t.<:.A yo, )

l

J.~""

\)~ I .t!

s-n N:'_j ;;-.....

kSL '1\.tt> :'\()"( Q.W\'

~

'- ..:~'<-..

Oo.,':,-~:2.,.,\,
I ~-J

·:,.

Part B- RESPONSE

DAtE

w >.RDFN

OR

RFCIONAL

------·---·---
DlRioCI DR

-~](e_l_jS-=._tl_ 1/ dip;ntisjicd wirh rhi.<o rnpon~;e, you ma.v ('PP'al to th' Ni!gimtal Dir~etor. Yourapf'ea.J rtW\l he rea>H•ed in the l<~_~imra/ Office ,nlhin 20 l,'olendar,da}''i of the dalf' (Jfthi~ ~lJUW~t'.

( >RI<;IN \L: RETt RN T() IN\1.\TE

(.'ASE NUMBER

Part C- KECEJPT

Rr..·tunt ro

L.-'.ST N \ME. FIRST. ~IlDDLE l'JITIAL

\l RJLlT

CASE 011 IMBER. - - - - - - - - -

--------RI'(J :.10

I '-IT

1:-.STITUTit ):-./

I\ IF
EXHIBIT 47
300

8P

13)

. ··~:?

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 302 of 372 Page ID #:305

INFORMAL RESOLUTION FORM

COC 1330.16.A January 16, 2008
Attachment A

NOTICE TO INMATE: Bureau of Prisons Program Statement 1330.13 requires that except as provided in 542.13(b) an inmate
............................................................. shall first present an issue ofconcern informally to staff and staffshaJI informally attempt to resolve the issue prior to submitting
a BP-9. A separate form must be used for each issue.

INSTRUCTIONS: Counselors will complete and attach this form to each Request for Administrative submitted. if not informally resolved.

David Bryant Inmate Name

06704-016 Register No.

QtrsJUnit

I.

Specific complaint (one 8 W' x II" continuation page may be attached):

I am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I cannot understand or communicate

effectively with people who do not know ASL. I am unable to participate effectively in the prison's work programs

because I am unable to understand or communicate with work managers and coordinators.

2. } What efforts have been made by the inmate to resolve the complaint informally? To whom has the inmate spoken?
C~uo~ u::a;'l. tl'l ~ ~\'S6..£\t·

3.

What action does the inmate wish to be taken to correct the issue?

ASL interpreter for work programs in order to understand and communicate with work managers and coordinators.

As an alternative, a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and programs for the deaf.

correction~mmmbl

Staff Circle One:
~ot Informally Resolved

Distribution by Correctional Counselor:

I. If complaint is informally resolved. maintain original on file in the Unit

2. If complaint is not informally resolved, attach original to BP-9 Form and forward to Administrative Remedy Clerk for processing.

Inf. Resolution Form Issued to Inmate

lnf. Resolution Form Returned to Counselor

BP-9 Issued to Inmate

BP-9 Returned to Counselor

BP-9 Delivered to Admin Remedy Clerk

Date:

1\ultc

1\1..1 1_lo

Time: Counselor:

100 0
55::==

f")t>C

NY12528:416076.l

EXHIBIT 47 301

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 303 of 372 Page ID #:306
Response to Administrative Remedy Case Number: 576335-F1 This is in response to your request for Administrative Remedy receipted on February 10. 2010. You allege because you use sign language you are unable to communicate effectively with staff, specifically work managers and coordinators. You request to be assigned an interpreter or be transferred to another institution with deaf inmates and programs for the deaf. Investigation of this matter reveals you currently have an Administrative Remedy pending regarding a request for an interpreter to assist you with communicating with correctional officers and other prison staff (Case No. 576334-F1 ). In this same case, you also request a transfer to another institution with deaf inmates and programs for the deaf and a vibrating pager for when announcement or warnings are made. The response to Case No. 576344-F1 is due to you on March 2, 2010. You should wait for the response to that case. If you are not satisfied with the response to Case No. 576344-F1, you may file an appeal through the appropriate procedures. Accordingly, this case is closed as REPETITIVE of a previous filing. If you are dissatisfied with this response, you may appeal by filing a BP-DIR-10 to the Bureau of Prisons, Southeast Regional Office, Attn: Regional Director, 3800 Camp Creek Parkway, SW, Building 2000. Atlanta, Georgia 30331-6226, within twenty (20) calendar days from the date of this response.
- I II I 2..0 l l
Date
EXHIBIT 47 302

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 304 of 372 Page ID #:307

! '.S. ()EPART\IF."'T OF RSTICE

REQl'EST FOR ADMINlSTRATIVE RE\1EDY

From: _ _ __,B::...:::r_.y-'a=nc.:t=-r...,--=D=-:a=-.::V-"1."'-.d~_,D"'-'-·----
L\ST 'I,V,JE. HRST. :\IIDDI.E INITIAL

06704-016
RE(;. NO.

_!lS_JL_ Colernan_L
INSTirtiTION

J'art A- IN\1ATE REQUEST

;z, I> 1 _; -:;

~-

'}I __ .~-\~ \_

_L )

'·-··W\')'~. . ---;:,_·_ •'- <:_.\,;_•* 1 -t-_,/•l•/

"" \\
·.':_(_:-,1\\Ycu:I,LZ..•'- ,,__ ,

\·yc·t:..,_ ~-~\ ..u <AJ: ; <.·.t 'Lv .I\•_,~·•A' •:OL "

·.!. ;• •; ; r..J(. t'C.: ·.!' (JJ.,·_

)'.2;·-cl ·~< ,_.,_,J\11\U·« ;+,-_ .L\'Kd'v·'y 'J~·--~ c'('.•.,j,,z._{ ··oi2-tf .~\),_ t-~.}..\~~l(_'l.,t_ \)lt•hA\.1\ I,, ..;>J''<..;_ .. \fY\_,;.(c.J.l \-,;J-1

,,~ ~\<u'• V-.<i-1J5\:.n

,.; ,)i\1-l '''!..(<.:":;~"';,
-'-"-....

1

t'·;> '_(\ \•'· <. ~~~'\'v<l. ~...,:;,.-; ~..... !'>'--'<..

'''"'-"'"~;..T<('il i•\ :..::\•t\-<'r\ 1:( ·::,p::.:.0."'\ ·i_',•.:),\)\',\\, :/-~:-,,J>lf· :~(_ -~tl A·.ol

'JAf'E
l'art R- RESPONSE

~ (!
~' ('~oc__../

IJ-\TF

W.\RDE'I OR REGIONAL DIRECTOR

cs -~ ~:._~ j(c._-:._j__ If di«an>fr.d ~-uh thi• rc•pnmc, '"" mav oppeal Ia the Re~tonal /Ji"rrar, hmr appeal mtl\t he rP<·ei'<·d in th<· R''#Wna/ilfficr •rthiu 20 calmdar da_.-s ofthe ,/ate af thi1 r;•~n>P.

OIW;IN \1.: HETl'RN TO 1:'\M.HE

C\ >;I-. :-ii!MBER .

Part ( '- IU:t'EWT
\l'HJECT

C'.\SF. ~l!MBicR UNif

l.NSTlTL'TICJ'-J

~ \ \ l t·

EXHIBIT 47 303

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 305 of 372 Page ID #:308

COC 1330.16.A January 16, 2008
Attachment A

INFORMAL RESOLUTION FORM

NOTICE TO INMATE: Bureau of Prisons Program Statement 1330.13 requires that except as provided in 542.13(b) an inmate shall first present an issue of concern informally to staff and staff shall informally attempt to resolve the issue prior to submitting a BP-9. A separate form must be used for each issue.
••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

INSTRUCTIONS: Counselors wtll complete and attach this form to each Request for Adnumstrauve R ' S J J I J d -9) J J F sub nutted. tf not tnformally resolved.

David Bryant Inmate Name

06704-016 Register No.

QtrsJUrut

Inmate Stgnature

1.

Specific complaint (one 8 \IJ'' x II" continuation page may be attached):

I am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I cannot understand or communicate

effectively with people who do not know ASL. [ am unable to understand or communicate effectively with medical

staff and healthcare providers, including mental healthcare professionals and pharmacists.

2.

What efforts have been made by the inmate to resolve the complaint informally? To whom has the inmate spoken?

\ ~ ~WI!\\0,.-. kdt, u;>'"' Our;.g b.t.\oooM"k \ b'(.:T,d...w~..\.\

3.

What action does the inmate wish to be taken to correct the issue?

ASL interpreter for communications with medical staff and healthcare providers, including mental healthcare

professionals and pharmacists. As an alternative, a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and programs for the

deaf.

G. DUNN Correctional {etiMSfnJR

Statr Circle One:
~U~ y Resolyel

Not Informally Resolved

Distribution by Correctional Counselor:

I. If complaint is informally resolved, maintain original on file in the Unit.

2. If complaint is !!Qt informally resolved. anach original to BP-9 Form and forward to Administrarive Remedy Clerk for processing.

lnf. Resolution Form Issued to Inmate

Inf. Resolution Form Returned to Counselor

BP-9 Issued to Inmate

BP-9 Returned to Counselor

BP-9 Delivered to Admin Remedy Clerk

Date:

lll.:dto

1bd10

Time: Counselor:

jOOO
~

l]'bo
<;:;:

NYI2528:416074.1

EXHIBIT 47 304

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 306 of 372 Page ID #:309

Response to Administrative Remedy Case Number: 576336-F1

This is in response to your request for Administrative Remedy receipted on

February 10, 2010. You allege because you use sign language you are unable to

communicate effectively with staff, specifically medical staff You request to be assigned an interpreter or be transferred

and healthcare providers. to another institution with

deaf inmates and programs for the deaf.

Investigation of this matter reveals pending regarding a request for an

you currently interpreter to

have an Administrative Remedy assist you with communicating with

dcyooeurarefacalstnioodnraaelqvouibeffrsiactteianrsgtraapnnadsgfeoertrhftooerrawpnrhiosetonhnearsnitnnaosftfui(tnCuctaieosmneewNniotth.o5dr 7ew6aa3fr3nin4inm-Fga1ste)a.sreIannmtdhaidpseros. agTmrahemecsafsoer,the

response to Case No. 576344-F1 is due to you on March 2, 2010. You should wait

the response to 576344-F1, you

that case. If you are not satisfied with the response to Case may file an appeal through the appropriate procedures.

No.

for

Accordingly, this case is closed as REPETITIVE of a previous filing. If you are

dissatisfied with this response, you may appeal by Prisons, Southeast Regional Office, Attn: Regional

filing a BP-DIR-10 to the Bureau Director, 3800 Camp Creek

of

Parkway, SW, Building 2000, Atlanta, days from the date of this response.

Georgia

30331-6226,

within

twenty

(20)

calendar

Scott A. M~ebrooks, Warden

EXHIBIT 47 305

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 307 of 372 Page ID #:310
REQt:EST FOR ADI\HNISTRATIVE REMEDY

From:

-~-----B-·r-y-a-n-t ,-

David
---

D.

L.~'ST 'i.U1E. ~JHST, !'viiDDLF: 1'-<ITL\L

f'art A- n IN~L\ : RE<)liEST

06704-016
REI~. "0.

L'<IT

USP Coleman I
lNSTlTiiTlON

i

'

'.,::.\\~, N

}..J~J_, 'vt.)( -j...._t"\r .. ...f"....).__\
'"·:::,\<,-'.l ~-"

\)._~_J--1_;.;)_,-,l~':::,
.)

~.(__.......,'-...··

,i.-TJ< ~-I-* '-""-- 1 ,. ,···-'lO.'

11 ,,,-<'\ {1"-i'l<L ,·i>~ i"·-, ,A· "~-L '•'-\:<"'( fJf<:\'c/' .J1l0.,' ~-'-·'~ ~c}..'.LU:....:...-~\...'~\ V'"''·f'~o >JJ....-

p / G(J.~e \,J_ r,·':/ ·'' -, 1 " Cf. q,J..o- -\[; '-'I'<Mr j'Q_,-,)l ,Ax) (j,J<:f\i'I'.N..(\ 1 c<..~ <-~·t\v__k( c..:, ~:+""- +{. 4 _ 11 [')fu(\ll'-,
1<Jc·V..Qc ·::,"::tJ-., .• ~-). A:-:._,..-, ~-...\\(\(\)..'1;\'Jc, i(z.:r_w)t- :;:_-~;:o,c,~c 1:0 ~ v<\":)y-\'-:J\-¥r-e:,·\-t<:-

ilh.·._\- \'' i'\Y/-.:\:t' ·~ ); u-l P 1..~S ]((YS ~~::< ·\-k c_l?'.:."A...~ ' 2 - !-1- I D_

'

/-:

~~ ,-~I _;}' > /

Part B- RESPONSE

RCIJD FEB 10 '10

IJAIE'

WAIUJE'N iJR RE<iiONAI~ DIRECTOR

s · ] ( o 3 3 1 - r : j _ !f Jiqlltn{it'tl wtth tltn re\pOn-.e, vou rnav appt'al to thP. f(('J?Mnal Oirf't'fur Your- appenl mtnt hC' raeil't!d in Jht' Ref(£onal i~ffice wilhin 10 caJ~ndnr Jdys of tht 1/.aie of t~ir r~..;p~.JHf. CASE NUMBER

l'art C- RECEIPT

-

- - - - - - LA~T

·-·-~----
'd.MF. f-IRST.

~liDDIL

!.'HilA!.

Cc\SE NUMBER: --·
tr~JT

I N'>TITUTlilN

EXHIBIT 47 306

BP<;;;on :If
:.f-·P 1L 1~8?

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 308 of 372 Page ID #:311

COC 1330.16.A January 16, 2008
Attach rnent A

INFORMAL RESOLUTION FORM

NOTICE TO INMATE: Bureau of Prisons Program Statement 1330.13 requires that except as provided in 542.13(b) an inmate
shall first present an issue of concern informally to staff and staff shall infonnally attempt to resolve the issue prior to submitting a BP-9. A separate form must be used for each issue.
••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

INSTRUCTIONS: Counselors will complete and attach this form to each Request for Administrative Remedy F submitted, if not informally resolved.

David Bryant Inmate Name

06704-016 Register No.

Qtrs./Unit

I.

Specific complaint (one 8 IIi' x II" continuation page may be attached) :

I am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL''). I cannot understand or communicate

effectively with people who do not know ASL. I am unable to participate in the prison's education programs and

vocational programs because I cannot understand or communicate effectively with the instructors or other students.

2.

What effortS have been made by the inmate to resolve the complaint informally? To whom has the inmate spoken?

I 'N.."{, ~"'-'l~ ~~ Q:-tucl<hooAl sb.H.

3.

What action does the inmate wish to be taken to correct the issue?

ASL interpreter for the education programs and vocational programs in order to understand and communicate

effectively with the instructors and other students. As an alternative, a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates

and programs for the deaf.

Staff Circle One:
c::Wo~ Not Informally Resolved

Distribution by Correctional Counselor:

I. If complaint is informally resolved, maintain original on file in the Unit.

2. If complaint is !!Qt informally resolved, attach original to BP-9 Form and forward to Administrative Remedy Clerk for processing.

lnf. Resolution

lnf. Resolution

BP-9 Issued

BP-9 Returned

BP-9 Delivered to

Form Issued

Form Returned to

to Inmate

to Counselor

Admin Remedy Clerk

to Inmate

Counselor

Date:

d2.1 hQ

1 \ \ '"1-\ t 0

Time: Counselor:

lo'< o

\1-c"

~ ---=zSI:::::=:::_

NY\2528:416070.1

EXHIBIT 47 307

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 309 of 372 Page ID #:312

Response to Administrative Remedy Case Number: 576337-F1
This is in response to your request for Administrative Remedy receipted on February 10, 2010. You allege because you use sign language you are unable to communicate effectively with staff, specifically education and vocational program staff. You request to be assigned an interpreter or be transferred to another institution with deaf inmates and programs for the deaf.
Investigation of this matter reveals you currently have an Administrative Remedy pending regarding a request for an interpreter to assist you with communicating with correctional officers and other prison staff (Case No. 576334-F1 ). In this same case, you also request a transfer to another institution with deaf inmates and programs for the deaf and a vibrating pager for when announcement or warnings are made. The response to Case No. 576344-F1 is due to you on March 2, 2010. You should wait for the response to that case. If you are not satisfied with the response to Case No. 576344-F1. you may file an appeal through the appropriate procedures.
Accordingly, this case is closed as REPETITIVE of a previous filing. If you are dissatisfied with this response, you may appeal by filing a BP-OIR-10 to the Bureau of Prisons, Southeast Regional Office, Attn: Regional Director, 3800 Camp Creek Parkway, SW, Building 2000, Atlanta, Georgia 30331-6226, within twenty (20) calendar days from the date of this response.

Scott A. Middiebrooks, Warden ' , . __)

Date ·

EXHIBIT 47
308

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 310 of 372 Page ID #:313

L.S. IWPAR'I ME:"IIT OF It STI< E

REQl1EST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

From: ___ Bryant, David D_,______ _
L \ST NA~n;, FIRST. :>11DOLE IMTIAL
Part A- INMATE REQt;EST

0 6 7 0 4 -:0.1__6__ --
RE<;. :-10.

_lliiP_£olema n I
l'iSTIH'TION

h:~, ·-<:-1', ,, '-"- ( ' ; ';::f.'i \ ) C< \J\ ", ' ·d-.:_

Part 8- RESPONSE /
-~-

i?CUDFEB 10'10

-----------·-- ·--- W.\RDEN OR IH'Gl01'.\L IJIRf.CIOK

Part <·_ RE< 'Eil'T

'' Blu_· r

L \ST N.-\,·1f:. f·fl<'>f. \llril.l[J-. I>;!TI \!.

EXHIBIT 47
309

c \SL ,\;\JMf!ER:

INSTITIITJ( lN

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 311 of 372 Page ID #:314

COC 1330.16.A January 16. 2008
Attachment A

INFORMAL RESOLUTION FORM

NOTICE TO INMATE: Bureau of Prisons Program Statement 1330.13 requires that except as provided in 542.13(b) an inmate
shall first present an issue of concern informally to staff and staff shall informally attempt to resolve the issue prior to submitting a BP-9. A separate form must be used for each issue.
• • • • • • • • • • * •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

INSTRUCTIONS: Counselors will complete and attach this form to each Request for Administrative Remedy F submitted. if not informally resolved.

David Bryant Inmate Name

06704-016 Register No.

QtrsJUnit

1.

Specific complaint (one 8 'h" x 11" continuation page may be attached) :

I am a deaf inmate. Since I am deaf, I am unable to hear even loud noises. I am unable to hear the prison's alarms.

I miss important warnings and announcements.

2.

What efforts have been made by the inmate to resolve the complaint informally? To whom has the inmate spoken?

3.

What action does the inmate wish to be taken to correct the issue?

Strobe or vibrating alarms or a vibrating pager. As an alternative, a transfer to a prison with other deaf inmates and
the with programs for deaf.

StatT Circle One:
~

Not Informally Resolved

Distribution by Correctional Counselor:

1. If complaint is informally resolved, maintain original on file in the Unit.

2. If complaint is I!!ll informally resolved, attach original to BP-9 Form and forward to Administrative Remedy Clerk for processing.

Date:

Inf. Resolution Form Issued to Inmate
I ( U~~D

lnf. Resolution Form Returned to Counselor
1 /ll )to

BP-9 Issued to Inmate

BP-9 Returned to Counselor

BP-9 Delivered to Admin Remedy Clerk

Time: Counselor:

~-

fS'\()
~

NY 12528:416066.1

EXHIBIT 47 310

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 312 of 372 Page ID #:315

Response to Administrative Remedy Case Number: 576338-F1
This is in response to your request for Administrative Remedy receipted on February 10, 2010. You allege because you are unable to hear prison alarms and miss important warnings. Because you are deaf, you request to be providing with a vibrating pager. You also request to be transferred to another institution with deaf inmates and programs for the deaf. Investigation of this matter reveals you currently have an Administrative Remedy pending regarding a request for an interpreter to assist you with communicating with correctional officers and other prison staff (Case No. 576334-F1 ). In this same case, you also request a transfer to another institution with deaf inmates and programs for the deaf and a vibrating pager for when announcements or warnings are made. The response to Case No. 576344-F1 is due to you on March 2, 2010. You should wait for the response to that case. If you are not satisfied with the response to Case No. 576344-F1, you may file an appeal through the appropriate procedures. Accordingly, this case is closed as REPETITIVE of a previous filing. If you are dissatisfied with this response, you may appeal by filing a BP-DIR-10 to the Bureau of Prisons, Southeast Regional Office, Attn: Regional Director, 3800 Camp Creek Parkway, SW, Building 2000, Atlanta, Georgia 30331-6226, within twenty (20) calendar days from the date of this response.

brooks, Warden

) /,'III.' c IQ
Date

EXHIBIT 47 311

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 313 of 372 Page ID #:316

•

REJECTION NOTICE - ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

DATE: MARCH 15, 2010

COORDINATOR~;' FROM: ADMINISTRATIVE REMBDY SOUTHEAST REGIONAL OFFICE

~

TO

DAVID BRYANT, 06704-016

COLEMAN I USP

UNT: L/M

QTR: Z01-103UAD

P.O. BOX 1023

COLEMAN, FL 33521

FOR THE REASONS LISTED BELOW, THIS REGIONAL APPEAL IS BEING REJECTED AND RETURNED TO YOU. YOU SHOULD INCLUDE A COPY OF THIS NOTICE WITH ANY FUTURE CORRESPONDENCE REGARDING THE REJECTION.

REMEDY ID DATE RECEIVED SUBJECT 1 SUBJECT 2 INCIDENT RPT NO:

576334-R1

REGIONAL APPEAL

MARCH 15, 2 010

OTHER NON-MAIL COMMUNICATION

TRANSFER - OTHER

REJECT REASON 1: YOU RAISE MORE THAN ONE ISSUE/RELATED ISSUE OR APPEAL 110RE THAN ONE INCIDENT REPORT (INCIDENT NUMBER) . YOU MUST FILE A SEPARATE REQUEST/APPEAL FOR EACH UNRELATED ISSUE OR INCIDENT REPORT YOU WANT ADDRESSED.

REJECT REASON 2: YOU MAY RESUBMIT YOUR APPEAL IN PROPER FORM WITHIN 10 DAYS OF THE DATE OF THIS REJECTION NOTICE.

EXHIBIT 47 312

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 314 of 372 Page ID #:317

U.S. Department or Justice
FesJeral Bun!au of Pnsons

Central Office Administrative Remedy Appeal

Type or use hall-pmnt pen. If attachments are needed. submit four copies. One copy each of rhe completed BP-229( 13 l and BP-2JOi I J 1. mcluding any attach-

ments must be submitted with this app~al.

From:

t t 1F2: Cvl

/.),o~.

>

;

I VI

r II l ~'._;'I-.;> !7 I :cb.~·r L-1 ..:._

AST l'<AMf FIRST. MIDDLE INITIAL

REG. NO.

UNIT

INSTITUTION

Part

A-

REASON
1:. """

'F"O',-R,CAuP.Pf.EA''L"~-\::_,;_.,_J

--:c-

{r"<M'--"U)..e_ , 1

4.·"-i..d•-1 "-?·<t-'

L'~'J"'·";-<-

{·-t~L)

Tt.,,.,_ce

cl·/f.eilf/

"r'"-'ot L~,t_;(<..C,.ft:~,J,,j

b""-}d,. r'4.'1 .~"'t(vL<y+ f>- ~--VJ-~'j ""\ ~;w.(t--<J_,,,_..; (ct.,dr.·'"j ,,_, jlx_

,:~-b\-r...,l.._t_) fjf-1" {u<) pP-'6) [.,_~c.; 0--N!-1 (t.fv-;_<t.), --+"' J ,J, ·-J- ;c..:~.·~ 2 Ct l~">f·~.:>-«?_ -f. "-'--~

;; /.:_)
IJAu-_),-e_~

(._/\. ) J.'-'- --LU'_)
(• t{ ,, kJ 11.~-- b

cl('

DATE
Part B · RESPONSE

DATE

GENERAL COUNSEL

ORIGINAL: RETURN TO INMATE

CASE NUMBER: - - - - - - - - - -

Part C · RECEIPT

CASE NUMBER: - - - - - - - - - -

---------------=---- Return to:
SUBJECT

_______L_A_ST_N_A_M_E_. _FI_RS_T_. M_I_D_DL_E_I_NI_T_IA_L____________R_E_G._N_O_. ____________U_l'<_IT__________IN_S_T_IT_U_TI_O:_-l___

DATE

SIGNATURE OF RECIPIENT OF CENTRAL OFFICE APPEAL
EXHIBIT 47 313

BP-231(13) .HJNF 2002

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 315 of 372 Page ID #:318

ll.\oj. llt.•partnu·nl uf .lu"'tin·

Regional Administrative Rt·medy Appeal

r:pL" ()J u-.r..· h •.!ll-pc11J~t p.."ll It .n:.Jc.hrncnt-... :tl(~ nt..·l·~k·J .... uhlllll (PUr ,__·~ljHt..':-.

..,, tlh 1h1" .1ppc:d

13op ot b3-vd. Q, rr"lll

' ' T ~<\\IE HRS I. WDDI F.l'illl,\1

c~..v·:rcLJ_ c\ G
RU; 'Hl

Part A· RE.\SOI'oO FOR .\PPEAL
I .?rf\ .:t#..U: \ll\l\;1.:k t....:::l<\c. 1--~.<-..e..·:. +k ~.:.~_~t?.::~u... & \\.e..1-.c1~ J,l.G-l<::.. 1\'\~ r~slr ~

~-n~ :tlctt tR*n~s (.d..d:z~.~\~ li\ +t~ ill2~.l BP-~ 7...'\J.... \?:.?1) 1\:t.:-.. bx..~" {'~(;.~':>0._ ?,.J'.J- 4€_ 1\(.ed

us \ex \R~ f<?.fi).L~:.t r..ct 6""- ,~ .Y'-.~u:d M.~ ~n~ J,•d..s. A-llert...::. fY\.L tc \I.e_;:"( ·:.,.(JLACXJ(, b.---++~\
ck: Mt (i,J\C...It<Y\ ?ru\Kr\~ ~t\}.cu_t s-t<t,~,~<l"'o~ 'D?~no I f\lZ.«?Qi n.£J.V bA..W.ne~ l.JkC\ +k,o\d...

w~-~ 01\.ls ()0Q_,)_tcn <..."< d..tz5 AClt

\ :ZM

"-s<J\..0.u.led \I

~

\H.QIVQ.. 4_,)\, /1\..c_ (6pcnx >oy kJcrro{ao'

M.\cid.lfu-w'Ls -Th 2(\t,~, (9J.J]''it \ ~A:k t_C:lc:>L \\0 51~334-Ft) irtCJ::ii.Si-Jf2rA~ c.b.Jrr<:. "'*'kt \

\tC.HVQ.. \\Qw \:RW;\i'S. ~ W\'i ~fl\~ 7~cvds '12S f\.(~/ bJ..-t j ~ C\d,

3 lt t\ ::AO \0
DATe
Part B · RESJ>ONSE

--- ·-
·-'

D.\TE
dI,ftdy~""•)"t "!hfieeddat"erltlhf t'h"i"s r"e'~'!p"Pn'""c'"-· ) <>U rn.ty .rppe"l It'• the' Gener :tl C.>unsd . Y(Jur appeal rnu~t be recet\t·d JH rhe GeRnEt:GtaIlOCNoAuLn ..D.dI'R-.EOCtfIt.U._'Rc wttilin .~0 calendar

OR!CilNAL: RETURN TU INMA'n:

CASE NUMBER: ;;?5/&-!fl

Part C - RECEIPT

CASE NUMBER: - - - - - - - - - -

Rt>lurn lu: ---~:-;-:-::::-:-~:::--:-::::-::--------­

Sl

l

BIF

C

T

:

_

_

_

_

LA~T NAME. FIRST, MIDDlE IN __________

ITIAL __

_

_

_

_

_

_

REG. NO ____

_

_

_

_

_

_

L':'-JI'f __

_

_

_

_

_

_IN~'S~T~IT~ll~T~IC~J\J~-

USP LVN

D-\TE

''' >N.·\fL1Rl:, RECIPIEI"T UF RE<iiONAL APPFAL
EXHIBIT 47 314

BP-23011 'JJ JU~JE 2002

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 316 of 372 Page ID #:319

l.S. DEP\RT\IENT OF JCSIICE

REQUEST FOR AO:\llNISTRATIVE REMEDY

From: ____Br_yan!,_t_Q.?-vid~-- _
L\ST :".\\IE, FmST. :..mnH.F_ l'<ITIAL

06704-016
REG.I'O.

U'o!T

USP Coleman I
!'<STITt TION

l'art A- [;\;:\lATE REQUEST

~".:.:

;

'
d

,

h

c

l(

t

. \ ; h·,

t t:·]"<-,•·R..

·'(.:;.~~.\<1".

"X 1__ :.,·.\•!•'"1 '• ··· '1''\·'~''--

'-·· ·'7'\.

I

( r -'--·~.:._..-

~. ~_,_.-

\"'.,.j,"'- </,..."f".\''f

'i_ ;_,;_ ...,.;......~._ D--::J..i-1<;•-;. ·" .:.A:-~z v~'C'''\ .lt_oi'_ ~) _\.-. t\-2 ~ \r: .. -_. d ,~ <.... c-:_\" kf ( ...\ --t\~:~-.C\ c_,.,·..-.:~ x '--.~ <-~'·-.t
'

.... ~"' ·•de, I 1'-?v~"-... \'<:_· \.~- ~·Vc\ U:'\\Q•_tl•/ ·-·'~.vl. -:._~(.X, \"~\L'<. \ ·-tivvs 'f~~c..c.... .r.-,...<_ ·ttx_ ~~,.?~~ 1 1. v ~:.,. , )L1: c ~ \ J. ..-~ \"-

:l.- Lf-j ()
UA r~
Part B- RESPONSE

RCUD FEB 1.0 '10

W \f<!Jf,'l UR REGJUNM DIRI< fOR

s J 5.i,z l j ' i - r':), Jj' di\HJit'l{it·d wrth !hi,· rnpml'it', nm mtl'r oppr>11l to the Rcf(ionul!Jfrecwr Yrmr appeal rnu\t bl: rrail't'd itt tlu Regimwl Offire within 20 cale.ndar da_v'> of fhe date 1/f.''l~~- ri'.'j!.JJtHf:'.

OI{J(;I'l \L: RETt:R"l TO IN\1 \ I'E

C\:-il" '<UMBER· .

Part C- RECEIPT

·-;1 BIF' r

l .:..'>T '-'·\~IE IIRSl \.IIDPLL I~ITI \I

C·\SE ~{lt\lBLR _ _ _ _ __ - -------~----1;:'-HT

I• IIi·

EXHIBIT 47
315

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 317 of 372 Page ID #:320

COC 1330.16.A January 16. 2008
Attachment A

INFORMAL RESOLUTION FORM

NOTICE TO INMATE: Bureau of Prisons Program Statement 1330.13 requires that eltcept as provided in 542.13(b) an inmate shall first present an issue of concern informally to staff and staff shall informally attempt to resolve the issue prior to submitting
a BP-9. A separate form must be used for each issue.
* •••••••• * ...................................................

INSTRUCTIONS: Counselors will complete and attach this form to each Request for Administrative Remedy Formu·9)

submitted, if not informally resolved.

~ - , {)

David Bryant

06704-016

S\:J\ \..\ .

1>(7'0"""-'-~~::.....:;...::;;..

Inmate Name

Register No.

QtrsJUnit

Inmate Signature

I.

Specific complaint (one 8 Y:" lt II" continuation page may be attached):

I am a deaf inmate, who uses the assistance of a hearing aid. The prison, however, has failed to give me batteries
f u for my hearing aid. :f'n,us -!A( \ )\}.\If OOhJ f '<.. C.R \\lesi. 'oA:t\1. C\f ;::. ~

..s \NDt'O 'S\1 L .

t"~::z~~::¥%fi~~~\i:~ 2.

Wh~A_Stfa~~ ~~the inmate to resolve the complaint informally? To whom has the inmate spoken?

3.

What action does the inmate wish to be taken to correct the issue?

b~\\ •

The prison should give me batteries for my hearing aid as they are needed. J")\.g,. 'p)...."\ ks \Q S (\R9cl

-ttl~ S~ <: l~t.. fti Ntp.r,~~ 'J.,d:"> ) .e %· '01"¥ \3 "" "S\J. g Co3=S.

G. DIINH
correctional6IDWnwa

Staff Circle One:
~Not Informally Resolved

Distribution by Correctional Counselor:

I. If complaint is informally resolved, maintain original on file in the Unit.

2. If complaint is llQl informally resolved, attach original to BP-9 Form and forward to Administrative Remedy Clerk for processing.

Date: Time: Counselor:

Inf. Resolution
Form Issued
to Inmate
\\&\ \\\> lb 00
~

Inf. Resolution Form Returned to Counselor
=tll•:c~1o;do-1-o--

BP-91ssued to Inmate

BP-9 Returned to Counselor

BP-9 Delivered to Admin Remedy Clerk

NY I2528:4 I6058. I

EXHIBIT 47 316

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 318 of 372 Page ID #:321
Response to Administrative Remedy Case No: 575644-F2 This is in response to your Request for Administrative Remedy received in this office on February 10. 2010, in which you claim you have not received batteries for your hearing aids. You allege the batteries you nave are not the right size for your hearing aids. Investigation into this matter revealed you received two pairs of size 13 hearing aids batteries as scheduled. According to manufacture specifications these type of batteries last six months with normal regular use. You wlll continue to have your batteries changed as scheduled by your medical provider. Your next scheduled batteries exchange is scheduled for April 10. 2010. Accordingly, this response is for Informational Purposes Only. !f you are dissatisfied wtth this response, you may appeal by t!fing a BP-10 to the BUREAU OF PRISONS, SOUTHEAST REGIONAL OFFICE, ATIN: REGIONAL DIRECTOR, 3800 Camp Creek Parkway, SW, Building 2000, Atlanta, GA 30331-6226, within 20 calendar days from the date of this response.
Date
EXHIBIT 47 317

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 319 of 372 Page ID #:322

U.S. Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Pmons

Central Office Administrative Remedy Appeal

fype or usc hall-point pen. If attachments are needed, submit four copies. One copy each of the completed BP-22Y( 13) and BP-2301 13 ), includmg any attach·

ments must be submi!ted with this appeal.
Wytc/ r From Cr'iQO tLAsiNAME. RRsT. MIDDLE rNmAL

1, c;;3-Cf1 -o REG. NO

l/,•:j::> 1/ IC.tocy;l\e

IT

INSTITUTION

Part A- REASON FOR APPEAL

:::c . I CCC\ (.)... c\~_c...C \ f"'\('Y",O...~ C¥\d

<!.0 f't'.P\u'f"\,c::...:::>-~ <l"\ {"(Y'.u-iCc-v--, s.~f"\ ~ UC>,fj<-

("'A.~L..t(), T ~ve c\;-Cf,c....,\t-y (JY\(\~iandln$ir S-po"-;Gf"\ C?r'\~k::,h. 1'\y ~\.)e..sf­

R_.,....... O..ll~c..~ t-o c..-\~d - ~pt-lo('e~ ..ac.v• ~t~ r\ { de::t-c..<led 'f\ ~ a:ttcc...h<:.J

B P-9 c.nd 0P-8) ~s 'oecn rc..~cJ 0..'0d t-~ f\cod -'h- my

r~~ ~ 'r"<0+
r-r-,'1 B'P-10, ~',\eA G

'r.>Cd"" rG:IY1c:d ,cc{_ X
fi-z../'1..-ot<\~ "P\eu_e:c

drd n~,

I'1D't"-
·=r=\ne..

~·v~ CA <"'e""f'On.S(": 1ebtx'"'·S..(.~ =\-o +-\,c

\ Q)'Y- C1
C;slhu-

'+"'u(.~)"S\6.·~"'rc.~ ? c'nA.o\O\.dc.ot~n~--t-\---,<:?'T,:-:,':~:-}:I:'.C...-~.b~'..I:::e•'<-::(""s"~'-•C~.elc~.-r:Jt~ -l o nufY~'\ r->-:t'-'-<r'0nI"eY\

\ e:

o

n,

::r:: t...:::\C.l..b ?v-r '"' ,\--,e. 5-t-\. \..\ ~+ ~"? C,_o'f:Z~....... ~c...'--"..:;:;,e c..0c::::rl-h'-IJ I f\ MC..:TB ~ c_\¢.. J ('\ ~ c-C.-t-e..' ·::r= "" (' \ u \ -~ ~ r " C) 0 c__\ o;sc:c -

Part B - RESPONSE

RECEIVED
APR 2 0 2010
Admmistrative Remedy Section Federal Bureau of Pnsons

DATE

GEI-.'ERAL COUNSEL

ORIGINAL: RETURN TO INMATE Part C - RECEIPT

CASE "'UMBER: - - - - - - - - CASENUMBER: - - - - - - - - -

Return to: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

SUBJECT

_

_

_

1,AST NAME. HRST. MIDDLE INITIAL ____________

_

_

_

_

_

REG. NO. ____

_

_

_

_

_

UNIT ___

_

_

_

_

INSTITUTION _ _ _ _ __

UPN LVN

DATE

SIGNATURE OF RECIPIENT OF CENTRAL OFFICE APPEAL
EXHIBIT 47 318

BP·231(13) JUNE 2002

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 320 of 372 Page ID #:323
Regional Administn1tive Remedy Appeal

From

L. f ~A.\1E, HRS I', MIDDLE INffl,\L

Part A- REASON FOR APPEAL

(}.p1-0L\-C\Lo
REG '<0

US? Cole m J_(\

t::-;rr

IN'> Tffl'TION

Part B- RESPONSE

,',~, > ) ,' - . . . t I'· , ,
!J, :..

. . . D/ITE

.

REGIONAL DIRECJ'OR

If dt:->~at1sfted '-"''lth this respon~e. days of the d..lte \1f thts tespmhC'.

you

may

.1ppcal

to

the-

General

CounseL

Your Jppe:.tl

mu::-t

be

received

in

the

General

Cl)un··ers
- ·• ·

Off, H..e

, h W!! tn

IO

. 1 J· Cd en ar

~~~"..L:~ETLRr-:_:r::_I:-.IMATE ----------.-;(-?-d;-3-9-'/--£-j Part C - RECEIPT

------------

CASE NUMBER:

CASENUMBER: - - - - - - - - -

Retunl to: ----;-:-::::::7:-:-:-:-:-::::-=-:---------

SLBJE

C

T:

_

_

_

LAST ;>;AME, llRST, .\11DDLE 1:-IITIAL ___________

_

_

_

_

_

REG. NO. ____

_

_

_

_

_

UNIT __

_

_

_

_

INSTITVTION _ _ _ _ __

!J~PIVN

DAfE

SIGNATURE, RECIPIENT OF RtUIONAL APPEAL
EXHIBIT 47 319

8P"230t_ 13)
!f!N>= ::JI'«'?

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 321 of 372 Page ID #:324

U.S. llEPAJl'I'MENT 0 .. JUS11CI\ Pcd<nl-of.Priooas

REQUESf FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

FI"'OIIl

n...u""" 1};.,.,;;. .... b.:,JJ~.pm. q DIUldunerru. ,_ ~

coplu. Add/~ llumoaiMr ... rtwrr~.

Brl(ant, pavid p, · ·

0~704-016

~·

USP Coleman I

LAS!' NAME, FIIISr, MDlDL& ~

' IlliG. NO.

UNn'

INS'lTJUI10H

Part A- ~TB JIE9llF.Sf ·
\ m :/-~ lt'\<t\2k ~ \ ~(>'-U1\H.3:it. II\ ~~~U/1 'S-.~'<\ \.:M~·~ l "k)L''l, \ \\-.w

cJj.~CJA.\\-.jl.k~f~\?<-oL~ ~\lC>'(Q" c:~\b"- \""' W\7.b\e. 1o ~brd,__'1r&.. 4?_(\~1

\<_~~ ~~~cl'CfW..&-·¥ei\l~l!> rot'tu.ll\4:>LO('I. Olk- I<'H'r<~~ \)«V(()t' (\"'4..(;.

\<.u\l'\ ~ cl~C.,'l-~~~01\. \ ~ CJ,)..("[~ 'Qt..,~ 'v\a..\4... II\~ ~~~~ \{~'-&­ ~ 't ''Q(s..l.J.J,:~ OC'.D~ ~C\.""'~ 'u~ '11'\.i.. 7-.~( \ -tnwt ~ +..J f""' 01' cle"'<ld,..

~·~-

h;- -tk~ ro$0.,~ , t am ~!$\\~ t\'\b::!: <!.l.ll~- ~a\.''6 -m ~ el\ili~ 00 2:..

Pf'~ -\::lt.I.J,::.1CY'\ ?-l.l~\~a. 11> ~. k, ':!!'\ Al\ern:ci't~ l I f9UP~t- ?--t-o.n~r-ffi?....

a-rx~\A~~, ~. '"m~~ ?NJ_ ~~~ ~.J::,. /

L/-1 D
o.tre

;..c:~,.,.u..=ll<.o~::::-:t>~E::~~=---~Ti1RI!OFiii!QiJ

Part B- USPONSE

RCUDFEB 10'10

DATa (/~---.-

--'"

.....

..,--...

,..,..,.._.

..

,_,., .....

..,_0/JI<o_»_.,o/":7/t:rr= WARDEN OR ltl!GIONAL DIIWCTOR

ORIGINAL; RETURN TO INMATE

CASE NUMBER: Sl(e3 -

-----------;:...-~·~------------.;._·--------------------------------·

Part C- RECEIPT

CASB NUMBER:-------

Return to:

~NAME, PIRST, MIDDLE fNlTtAL

RI!O. NO.

INSTlTUTION

suw~'----~---~~-------------------------

DATE

RECIPII!NT'S SIGNATUIU! (STAPF MEMBER)

EXHIBIT 47
320

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 322 of 372 Page ID #:325

COC 1330.16.A January 16, 2008
Attachment A

INFORMAL RESOLUTION FORM

NOTICE TO INMATE: Bureau of Prisons Program Statement 1330.13 requires that except as provided in 542.13(b) an inmate

.
I

............................................................... shall first present an issue of concern informally to staff and staffshall informally attempt to resolve the issue prior to submitting
a BP-9. A separate form must be used for each issue.

I

INSTRUCTIONS: Counselors will complete and attach this form to each Request for Administrative Remedy Fa

submitted, if not informally resolved.

David Bryant lnrnate Name

06704-016 Register No.

QtrsJUnit

1.

Specific complaint (one 8 ~" x II" continuation page may be attached):

I am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I have difficulty understanding

spoken English. I am unable to understand and enjoy television because the closed-captioning is not turned on.

I 'h7MIL t.ul$1 2.

What

efforts have been made by the
Cti'i\.m.u..rh(P..~

inmate

to

resolve the complaint informally?
CAU 00 1o~C

To whom has the
~,

inmate spoken?
Q.(Sl(l~lo/

3.

What action does the inmate wish to be taken to correct the issue?

That closed-captioning be enabled on a prison television available to me. As an alternative, a transfer to a prison

with other deaf inmates and with programs for the deaf.

anaeer's Review
wJ

Staff Circle One:
~Not Informally Resolved

Distribution by Correctional Counselor:

1. If complaint is informally resolved, maintain original on file in the Unit

2. If complaint is !l2l infonnally resolved, attach original to BP-9 Form and forward to Administrative Remedy Clerk for processing.

Date: Time:

lnf. Resolution Form Issued to Inmate
\ \ '-"I!>
1 01.:> b

lnf. Resolution
I Form Returned to
counr'or
I ?..\ I D
13tC

BP-9 Issued to Inmate

BP-9 Returned to Counselor

BP-9 Delivered to Admin Remedy Clerk

=D'=== Counselor:

:55

NY 12528:416066.1

EXHIBIT 47 321

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 323 of 372 Page ID #:326

//

/

Response to Administrative Remedy Case Number: 57634t-F1

This is in response to your Request· for Administrative Remedy receipted. in this office on February 10, 2010, in which you request a television in your assigned housing unit be programmed for closed captioning so you can enjoy television viewing. You also request to be transferred to an institution with other deaf inmates.
An investigation into your complaint revealed. that prior to your placement in the Special Housing Unit (SHU), arrangements were being made for programming a television with closed captions. However, SHU inmates are not permitted television privileges. Therefore, upon your release from SHU back to general populstion, you· may request one of the unit televisions be programmed for closed ca~n viewing.
Your request for transfer to an institution with other: deaf inmates and programs for the deaf is being addressed in Administrative Remedy Case No. 576334-F1 and, therefore, will· not be addressed again in this response.
Based' on OUI' findings, your request for·Administrative Remedy is DENIED. If you are
dissatisfied with. this response, you may appeal by filing a BP-DIR-1 0 to the Bureau of
. Prisons, Southeast Regional Office, Attn: Regional- Director, 3800 Camp Creek Pari<way, SW, Building 2000, Atlanta, Georgia 30331-6226, within twenty (20)calender days from the date of this response.

Date.

EXHIBIT 47
322

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 324 of 372 Page ID #:327
EXHIBIT 48

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 325 of 372 Page ID #:328

u.s. Department or Justice
Federal Bur""u of Pris!lns

Central Office Administrative Remedy Appeal

iJc CiA-{- U vR ,c.p-v, tie Type or use
ments must

ball-point pen. If be submitted with

attachments this appeal.

are

needed,

submit

four

copies.

One copy each of the completed BP-229( 13) and BP-230( 13). including any attach-

From:

1

1

v, )

LAST NAME. FIRST, MIDDLE IN1TIAL

REG. NO.

UNIT

L 1
INSTITUTION

I
I
I
i

I

Part 8 - RESPONSE

I

I

I
\
I

RECEIVED
APR 2 0 2010
Administrative Remedy Section Federal Bureau of Prisons

I
I

I

DATE

ORIGINAL: RETURN TO INMATE

Part C - RECEIPT

GENERAL COUNSEL CASENUMBER: ------------------

Rerumto: ___________________________________

CASENUMBER: ------------------

LAST NAME. FIRST, MIDDLE INITIAL

REG. NO.

UNIT

INSTITUTION

SUBJECT:------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

UPN LVN

DATE

SIGNATURE OF RECIPIENT OF CENTRAL OFFICE APPEAL
EXHIBIT 48

BP·231(13)

324

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 326 of 372 Page ID #:329

/

REJECTION NOTICE - ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY DATE: MAY 7, 2010

FROM: ADMINISTRATIVE CENTRAL OFFICE

TO

DAVID BRYANT, 06704-l

VICTORVILLE USP

P.O. BOX 5400

ADELANTO, CA 92301

2 B

QTR: B23-121L

FOR THE REASONS LISTED BELOW, THIS CENTRAL OFFICE APPEAL IS BEING REJECTED AND RETURNED TO YOU. YOU SHOULD INCLUDE A COPY OF THIS NOTICE WITH ANY FUTURE CORRESPONDENCE REGARDING THE REJECTION.

REMEDY ID DATE RECEIVED SUBJECT 1 SUBJECT 2 INCIDENT RPT NO:

576334-A1

CENTRAL OFFICE

APRIL 20, 2010

OTHER NON-MAIL COMMUNICATION

TRANSFER - OTHER

APPEAL

REJECT REASON 1: YOU SUBMITTED YOUR REQUEST OR APPEAL TO THE

WRONG LEVEL. INSTITUTION,

YOU SHOULD HAVE FILED AT THE cp&GIONAL ~ OR CENTRAL

OFFICE LEVEL.

REMARKS

YOU MUST RESUBMIT THIS APPEAL TO THE REGION.

EXHIBIT 48
325

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 327 of 372 Page ID #:330
EXHIBIT 49

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 328 of 372 Page ID #:331

Regional Administrative Remedy Appeal

lypc or u~c ball-point pen. If ..Ht;.:u.:hments arc ncetled. suhmit four copies. One copy of the completed BP~229( IJ) including any atta~.:hments must be '\ubmttt·•J

wHh this Jppeal.

....

-P=->:-f From·

L-A:'ltiT'INJ2A.~~1(\E~,±th-:Rb.s.T~..o.ML.I~Dk.D::L;E_\I/NX.I.T.lI:A\dL..~.J..DL-­

()to1-0L{-O\lo
REG. NO

us'? Col1201 J.C\ \

UNIT

INSTITUTION

Part A· REASON FOR APPEAL

l J.-ff\ ~~ 1~ rt\~ U'd-. ~l"'\....Ai\\.0-k_ 111 ~lc.J<\ '5\:'J' L~~~l •A-s1..''). l h?-ve.

cl,.Q.B~\'hjl~r:::,\'MdJ~s?=='~\1 E~'~, \1\'1 f<.sju..d- & ~ +c ~ -le.levts\CY\l.Ul~ cit)~

~c:i\\d-Th.i(\~Ol\ oe 'J..~ ~ J...Pfl.~ W\~ pro~m:!. &-tk ~(cJ...q.Jz•..~l~ 1,_-f-4t ~

13Ni :rol B??') hn bte.0 ~~ ).N)._ -tk f\Uld.... \k ff\.Y \~ hu N1f- bu, r~lf\.ldt-t::l., ~~~

1 f\!:1\~ f~wr~ U-f>b<'l fY\..Y roJe~ 9wl -tk -::HU.., it> h:tve.. .it, r~~.t..d- -M4 k ().Jl<t -k-le VtSIIY\
k ~ po·:pJr\~ ~ ~~~ti\ v\a.t.-:.1~ Abo 1 -tk f~~ Q.~ls it> Jdd,r~-+4_

n'* GiU\'" s~aQ.-+Iy?Jfl\-s&Quu..o(.f.f(-r\r&tht~<\L1'~ \~ :::HcU-\~ k.( ~ 11\~ ~ ' ~,;J~c:.

~
\{\~

cl~-~~~ tu.(l\~
"''~"N_O-~ \~Jtt:.

/:~I = ~ Q~ 3 J 11

C -t-f".fl dlf=L-0-{'h<>'•(;

Part B • RESPONSE

r:::-·1.
:'t: / ,~ / ,f!
I,,.,,-- ; ( --.___-... ·~~
MAR 75 2GlO

. .

DATE .

REGIONAL DIRECTOR

ORIGI~AL:~~~-TO ,1(?1R6$"1-;(J If dtssallsfied wuh
days of the date of

thts response. rhts response.

you

may

appeal

to

the

General

Counsel.

Your

appeal

must

be

received

in

the

General

Counsel's

orr·.
H.:e

· h.10
wlf

30

1 d· ca en ar

INMATE

CASE NUMBER:

PartC-RECEIPT

-------------------------------·---

CASENUMBER: -----------------

Return to: SUBJECT:

-_-_ --_-_ :L-A_-s_'T-_N-_A_-M_-E_R-. _-R-_s-_-T-._-~-_-no-_-o-_L-_-E--1:-l-1-TRIE-GA. N-OL.--------------U-N-IT-----'-N-STI_TU_TI-ON--

liSPIVN

DATE

SIGNATURE. RECIPIENT OF REGIONAL APPEAL
EXHIBIT 49
327

BP·230(13) HINS:: ')(\(')?

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 329 of 372 Page ID #:332

Regional Administrative Remedy Appeal No. 576341-R 1 Part B - Response
This is in response to your Regional Administrative Remedy Appeal receipted March 15, 2010. You claim the current television viewing schedule in your housing unit at the Federal Correctional Complex, Coleman, Florida, is not programmed for closed captioning so you can enjoy television viewing. As relief, you request staff provide one of the current televisions for closed captioned and transfer you to an institution for deaf inmates.
We have reviewed your complaint and determined the Warden's response adequately addresses your concerns. As you were previously informed, the unit team has established a permanent television viewing schedule for closed captions. You were also informed by the institution that your request regarding a transfer to another institution would be addressed in Administrative Remedy case number 576334-F1. However, you have been transferred to the United States Penitentiary, Victorville, California. Finally, you fail to present information to this office which warrants further consideration.
Accordingly, this Regional Administrative Remedy Appeal is partially granted. If dissatisfied with this response, you may appeal to the Office of General Counsel, Bureau of Prisons, 320 First Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20534. Your appeal must be received in the Office of General Counsel within 30 calendar days of the date of this response.

Date

irector, SERO

EXHIBIT 49 328

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 330 of 372 Page ID #:333
EXHIBIT 50

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 331 of 372 Page ID #:334

U.S. l>eputment of Justice
of Federai Bureau Prisons

Central Office Administrative Remedy Appeal

Type or use ball-point pen. If attachments are needed, submit four copies. One copy each of the completed BP-229(13) and BP-230(13), including any attach-

ments must be submitted with this appeal.

fr"Q t: Wyt d From:

I

0
LAST

N1 AME.

FIRST,

MIDDLE

INITIAL

cc3-0Y-o REG. NO. ' '

Part B - RESPONSE

RECEIVED
APR 2 0 2010
Administrative Remedy Sectlo
Federal Bureau of Prisons n

DATE

GENERAL COUNSEL

------------------------------------------ ORIGINAL: RETURN TO INMATE
Part C - RECEIPT

CASENUMBER: ----------------

CASENUMBER: ----------------

Return to: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - SUBJECT: ______L_A_ST_N_A_M_E,_A_RS_T_. M_I_DD_L_E_IN_m_A_L___________R_EG_. _NO_. ___________U_NI_T _________IN_S_TI_TU_T_IO_N___

DATE

® _______ _

SIGNATIJRE OF RECIPIENT OF CENTRAL OFFICE APPEAL
EXHIBIT 50 330

BP-231(13)

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 332 of 372 Page ID #:335

REJECTION NOTICE - ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY DATE: MAY 7, 2010

PROM: ADMINISTRATIVE CENTRAL OFFICE

TO

DAVID BRYANT,

VICTORVILLE USP

P.O. BOX 5400

ADELANTO, CA 92301

2 B

QTR: B23-121L

POR THE REASONS LISTED BELOW, THIS CENTRAL OFFICE APPEAL

IS OF

BEING REJECTED AND RETURNED THIS NOTICE WITH ANY FUTURE

TO YOU. YOU SHOULD INCLUDE A CORRESPONDENCE REGARDING THE

COPY REJECTION.

REMEDY ID DATE RECEIVED SUBJECT 1 SUBJECT 2 INCIDENT RPT NO:

576341-Al

CENTRAL

APRIL 20, 2010

OTHER OPERATIONS

TRANSFER - OTHER

OFFICE APPEAL

n REJECT REASON 1: YOU DID NOT PROVIDE A COPY OF YOUR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY APPEAL (BP-10)

REGIO~L OFFICE

FORM

A COPY

OF THE (BP-10) RESPONSE FROM THE REGIONAL RfCTOR.

REJECT REASON 2: YOU MAY RESUBMIT YOUR APPEAL IN PROPER FORM WITHIN 15 DAYS OF THE DATE OF THIS REJECTION NOTICE.

EXHIBIT 50 331

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 333 of 372 Page ID #:336
EXHIBIT 51

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 334 of 372 Page ID #:337

ll.'-;. l)(•parhnenl of Ju~tire

Regional :\dministrative Remedy Appeal

c~.vl-L-LJ- c~ G

RlJ; 'JO

l.''HT

Part A· RE.\SON FOJ{ AI'I'EAL
I ?,m A.oli..l.f \1\ ~ ~,..::J<\1::: 0-.:'::,;>_." +k ~.:.~~t:2.c\u.. ~ '1\e,.A..c>~ J,lc:l""~ IY\/ r<f-j·.k'* ~

~n ~ J..\clt 't9..*n'(-s (.c~..d21..l\u ,,, +t~ m2~1.. BP-1s ?..'\J._ '?>?9\ '1\:l.c, bl2?'" f'lt..~~:.<cl -z..rct. ~ 1\{ed
6- {'(\~ (~l).i'::.l- \\As (IC\- 6<~"- \~:'1\J<d..ted f(\..~ 'flY.Z.J\~ A'<J:S ;~..\lat.;, (1\.L tc h.e_M ·3_.c;v,r-d.__, bL,++~,
cJc M·t ~~.,r,.c_i1\Y\ ?lb~r\y v::,~cu.+ :s."\-<1:,"\,~CK'<...\~ 'D?_fu(\e::. I f\~«d 1\i:?t.V bA-W.nes. t.JI~C\ +k.olot ON..s wv·..tJ'n 0( d.Je..J <\cJ· W~·~ \ tl..M ''~U\.IIcL_JEt:ll' -hi \H.QIIJQ_ -tkJY\, /1\.c.. (e::>pcn.·x.. t>y lJttro(a( M.\ddldxuA.s -\"t; ZN;tk, (9J...rr~'t- \ ~'Ak U~J..'!L (\,:, 51~33'-{-Ft) [r1CJ:i;1,5dt?r-A~ cJtJ..Irns -*'k:t \
\tC.HVQ_ \\.l1w 'b;L-t\_e;\~ s, ~ ~'j ~fn6 ?,_,£ 112:::, [\e_~,'' bv_-1- 1cLt_, (\d.

D,·\TE
Part IJ • RESPONSE

St<~NAI\iKE f >F REl)l'LSTER

. --

OR!Cii~AL RETURN TO INMATE

-575/f'{/-,1{/

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

C.•\SENUMBER:

Part C · RECEIPT

CASE NUMBER: - - - - - - - - - -

Rerum tu: -----;-:-;:::::-=-:-:-:--::-:-:-::::--::---------

----------------------------~==- \l:l! If< T

LAST N-\ME. Fff{';T, MIDD! E l'liTIAL

REG. 'IO

L':-i!T

l:-iSTITUTION

USP LVN

D.-\TE

SJ(;N.\Il'RE. RECIPIENT OF R!::Ci!UNAL APPEAL

BP-230! 13) JU~JE 2002

EXHIBIT 51

333

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 335 of 372 Page ID #:338
Regional Administrative Remedy Appeal No: 575644-R1 Part B - Response This is in response to your Regional Administrative Remedy Appeal receipted March 15, 2010. You allege you wear a hearing aid and need to be provided replacement batteries when your old ones weaken. You further claim you are a deaf mute and need your hearing aid to hear sound. As relief, you request to be provided replacement batteries as needed. A review of your medical records revealed you were issued two size 13 replacement hearing aid batteries on December 10, 2009. Further investigation revealed you were transferred to USP Victorville on March 18, 2010. Although you were scheduled to receive replacement batteries while you were housed at USP Coleman I, you should refer to the Health Services Unit at your current institution to determine their local policy as to how and when replacement batteries will be issued to you. Accordingly, this response is for informational purposes only. If dissatisfied with this response, you may appeal to the Office of General Counsel. Your appeal must be received in the Office of General Counsel, B a of Prisons, 320 First Street, NW, Washington, DC, 20534, within 30 calendar ay of th date of this response.
-~lrlliL
Date
EXHIBIT 51 334

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 336 of 372 Page ID #:339
EXHIBIT 52

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 337 of 372 Page ID #:340

U.S. Department of Justice Fe.Qeral Burl!au of Prisons

Central Office Administrative Remedy Appeal

Type or use ball-point pen. If attachments are needed. submit four copies. One copy each of the completed BP-229( 13) and BP-230! 13), including any attach-

ments must be submitted with this appeaL

From: f3r £lsi tAM£ Fl~1~ ~DI.E INITIAL

cr;, 7011- o '~ REG. NO.

UNIT

US Y' V•c.forv/1(~
INSTITUTION

Part A- REASON FOR APPEAL
--r. <l<-< "'- ~+- 11->\A~ rv..J. J: L'-"'M'-"'CA.j.J2. 11 ~'C<-1 ~~ L·-')•H-r~ {''4c,L"} T.l-v-..e cJ.,/~GLA;.,

vAkr-sk_,J,.,_j 'f'lu.-t iW}._c,l-,. ~ ~vL 5 -f ~.-- ~'~S ""'.-1 \;;u.lk>,e..; {d.a-iz:.,IJ •-1 :1~

C-tb\-vLu..,~ oP-1' t.A) .t>P-'0) 4.; ~ at"i.L,J . .::F JrcL.. ·-/- ·~·ve Ct \LC,pc~~ -}:. !'-(

-f>P~ r Or J /~ i{~v-cl-t t ~, d-o I{!, ~) .J.<-L ~ bf f"l y ("-i,(.--'~.j. t..t.~ /VI-- ~

1 (LML-AU. ft { Wv' .-,_ ~ <~ S ~¥{" kJ fl-'t.L -# L~ 50-.A<-L '?OcU -..J.1 h----1- t / . f

ch /lo} ~cpof\ frrw-l1 vv,JLPv -1- wrr k.---1 ~1./-e.r.~s-

DATE
Part B • RESPONSE

DATE

GENERAL COUNSEL

Part C • RECEIPT

CASENUMBER: ------------------

Rewmto: - - - - - - -L-A-S-T-N-A-M-E.-F-IR-ST-,-M-ID-D-L-E-IN-I-TI-AL- - - - - -

REG. NO.

UNIT

INSTITUTION

SUBJECT=--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DATE

@----~-

SIGNATURE OF RECIPIENT OF CENTRAL OFFICE APPEAL
EXHIBIT 52 336

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 338 of 372 Page ID #:341

REJECTION NOTICE - ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY DATE: MAY 7, 2010

FROM: ADMINISTRATIVE CENTRAL OFFICE

TO

DAVID BRYANT,

VICTORVILLE USP

P.O. BOX 5400

ADELANTO, CA 92301

2 B

QTR: B23-121L

FOR THE REASONS LISTED BELOW, THIS CENTRAL OFFICE APPEAL IS BEING REJECTED AND RETURNED TO YOU. YOU SHOULD INCLUDE A COPY OF THIS NOTICE WITH ANY F'UTURE CORRESPONDENCE REGARDING THE REJECTION.

REMEDY ID DATE RECEIVED SUBJECT 1 SUBJECT 2 INCIDENT RPT NO:

575644-Al

CENTRAL OFF'ICE APPEAL

APRIL 20, 2010 NON-MEDICATION/PRESCRIPTIONS-BED BOARDS,

IDLES,

ETC.

REJECT REASON 1: YOU DID NOT PROVIDE A COPY OF' YOUR

REGION~.~ OFF'ICE

ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY APPEAL (BP-10) FORM ~Vfi A COPY

OF' THE (BP-10) RESPONSE F'ROM THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR.

REJECT REASON 2: SEE REMARKS.

REJECT REASON 3: YOU MAY RESUBMIT YOUR APPEAL IN PROPER FORM WITHIN 15 DAYS OF THE DATE OF THIS REJECTION NOTICE.

REMARKS

ALL FOUR PAGES OF' THE BP-11 MUST BE LEGIBLE. CONSIDER WRITING ON EACH PAGE WITH THE SAME WORDING.

EXHIBIT 52 337

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 339 of 372 Page ID #:342
EXHIBIT 53

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 340 of 372 Page ID #:343

I .S. llt-p<lrtment nf .fu'itin~

Regional Administrative Remedy Appeal

ryre ()r thl' h.JI! ·pntnt p~.·n_ If .I!LH:hrn..'nh .trc llt:('dc:J ..... uhmH ltJUr (Orle<.. On.: ,._·upy ot !ht; l."\)mrlt•ll'tl RP-22t)tJ1 I mduJing .my .!ltJI.."hmcnl<; !l\UO.,.( he ... uhrmHcd v..Hh th1.., Jj)fll..•..d

Brrant, DaYld
L \ST NAME. fiRST .~11DDLE IN I! L\L

06704-016 RHi NU

2-B
UNIT

USP Vi~ille
INSIITLTHlN

!'art \ · REASON FOR .\PPEAL

It bas been .are tban 20 days since 1 sut.itted a m--9 on April S, 2010 and I hafl! not receiYed a response. lly ~laint also has oot been re.edied.

I aa a deef tr.ate and I ~cate 1n .beriam Sign :t.anguage (•ASL•) • I do DOt ~cate effecthely in
vrttteo or spokeD EDglisb and biDe been see1tiDcJ ~Uons for llf disability. To that eod, I was worUnq througb tbe BoP's adllinistrathe r:e.edy process wbeD I was transferred frca USP Coleiii!ID I to OSP VictorTille. I beliE!'ftl this transfer was retaliatory and tiODe to try to frustrate 11f <Xllll()letiou of tbe r:e.edy process. Tbe transfer has not relll!died llf need for ~ioos and was an attE!IIIPt to frustrate 11f use of tbe r:e.edy
process and 11f ability to ~cate with llf attomeys.
duriDCJ"'_.th«
I request that 11J pre9ious grieY~~I~Ce processes be all~ to qo forwud and that I DOt be transferred again r:e.edy process. A1so, because tbe transfer has not n.edied 11f need for ac=o-daticms, I request tbe relief 1 was seekiDq before I was tnmsfern!d. I request (a) worJtiDg lleaJ:1Dq aid batteries on an as needed basis; (b) safe access to closed-1::aptioo1Dg TV; (c) a qualified ASL interpreter to eoable • to ~cate with COs, ~cal staff, JleDtal beeltbcare wodters, pbaxwacist.s, education and vocatiooal instructors, and worJt supervisors; and (d} a vihratiDq paqer to alert • to prison alar.s and otber amnmc:ewents.

DATE
Part B • RESPONSE

SIGNATURE OF REQL;ESTER

DArE

REGIONAL DIRECTOR

If di~SJ{I.\tteLI wnh th1-:. re.,pon~e. you m<..~y Jppeal to the Gener::.tl Counsel. Yuur appeal mu~t be rec~tved 1n the General Counsel'-; Office w11hin JO c:.dend:..tr

JJy'> of the- d:..tre uf lhts response.

ORIGINAL: RETUR~ TO INMATE

CASE ~UMI3ER:

Part C • RECEIPT

CASE NCMBER:

Rt.•turn !o: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I.AST NM~>1E. fiRST. ~liD OLE INITIAL

REG. NO.

t:NIT

INSTITUTION

'iUBJEC r - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

USP LVN

llAIE

SIGN,\TURE. RECIPIE:--IT OF REGIONAL APPEAL

BP-230( 13) JUNE 2002

EXHIBIT 53
339

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 341 of 372 Page ID #:344

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF lt!S'IICE Federal Bureau of Pn..;on~

REQUEST HlR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

\nile From:

r\pe OF /O'e hull -point fJl'1l.
_JiiTant, David D.

~falfflt"hmcnt5 art' needed, Hthmir for-l.r copies.
06704-016

Addirional inwrucrions ,, rl!ver:w.
~U3~1'")PCoVl1ecm.IUan

~

LAST :-<AMI<:. FIRST, MIDOLE INITIAL

l''iiT

I:-<Sl1Tl1TION

l'art A- INMATE REQUEST .. r~ L··~(••~.,_ ·,('-",~ .... ,A.

Part 8- RESPONSE

= ~

c:::r.:
(lOll>

=

. , ;>c,
<c
on- iw"z.

:l><o
":::0
U1

':,
I")
,'TJ

;Qo ;<=.-.,.,,
,rf-'(\='1)

"::1:
~ 0

·C.C:::
:?1
1.::1

w

DAfE

WARDEN OR REGIONAL DIRECTOR

ca/e5 If di,wti•fied with this "<pons., vtm may uppeal to the Ne~ionul l>iredor, Your appeal mu1·t be reaiv.d in tM Re~:innaJ Offiu •·ithin 10

days "{I he dat

OS=f"'1~.).:=+-4i-:::- OR!I;I"'\L: RETI'R"' TO INMATE

CASE NUMBER:

Part C- RECEIPT
!<durn lo
\LIBJH:r· ____

RHi. ~0

C'\SE NUMBER:--------·-·----

1':-.:IT

I ~STITUTI( IN

[lATE

3P-229P1) ,1tJPil ,-~~2

EXHIBIT 53
340

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 342 of 372 Page ID #:345
EXHIBIT 54

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 343 of 372 Page ID #:346

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 344 of 372 Page ID #:347

Request for Administrative Remedy
Case No.: 585748-Pl
TrttpsthearrhrmaceaeiensnvesiAisvfoidfreesumee~d1srl,irnineoe1g.yndsrf1o~reAureaysavgopptwauaro1ni7invncwlreseeee1sdr5sReueb,teroemeiskn2ee1gya?edn1loyklg0uitonh.rPwgeracoeRccdIareoeneqtmsmtu~oymete.hodsogyuetdoraAfppto17srfrooroeenrrvqcwAeieuoflasedoiusrsmedr.st,fi,nyaiynnoiYsodyuostuourrtuatihtdsacutirialavsesttcioeaqoebyuniRorelpue.esimqrt~u1neyoedyosyort~'tuntbroretohueygohur AVTAsRRyaunooeeidrbmdcutgemamrteivloodciiiyAnnoesrDsvwaindsiNleitomtlioaronnOl.faiefsunntfie5efioyvws7sinoecst6teru.oer3aMerR.4tbei1arSvmfer-eicSRei,elqnhdlpecuyRaede1eadec8asrmdiaNe,ptreftpodei2rdcyvesep0uesaav1mreesllee0sludbyva.ob.eli,anmreo,rduYieMrs2esosauys0pyipo0oienuho8nn1a,nsd4swvtis, neineaetgsir2tunea0tetrp1idomet0oresee.enepsRvdnsioieig.onmTcnAuasehaeldsdeCtysmredieudunNiifrnntosorytie.rtosetinthts,5trueutl7aayst5iti~t,iSt6ouvo4nestau4wspt-oohRRpfe•el.mE-a~aeraenrdsseyd,t YVviy(noicoidu)uceotohaotrpaocdrvhceveoeprinslrssletiepos; o:teonc(cbo(i)amcfa)illmoacwrsatuomeelnrlldikseyc-ipancahtgarneoepdnqhwtieueooieattnhahsreictenedcsrdgetastaestanfhlifnedet;ohvurfbianoosnacuildetlogtomnhew(e;reniai)net(sgstad.el laovecnai-cbtoaqrymnauptmaeianlowsidg-frnaiieteptiedeoadnrgesiednr(TatTebttYorapUsS)ariPsel;oeterrrt
eMAawtbawwiYh(iatawhfneddnhaaaoctisliam)vnimetnuetehscthsthaidrhnrhaaesgnabetot'teoeeeTttaeoeotevafdnhrndtshodoeeuwehkhenvnhtAnbolwrhaoebesatiyndcenpparyseislekdtrrutrshaoahtadiihobiesaanhannnslrovetdsleegegpAoariTr2dE.daekdefbdTF0on-agaeqfeme,cYuorrwiesi.veuiAat,dis/rdhcniV2seppscetoasc0sNhatrinaAemiysdit1ooonoeonosee0elnndvsryonml(,teosoiuaseosAnauuontfrfpyfdaiefSnrrliesfohowonLontrdaciorudnatfeibcrhannhotsbrtOeeideiyTgrtiiradoaaudovasrshillultnuiir;rineyaritennnle·grordoeecnrsseetmep(auhdroeositdbqdtioradatesuq)euiclttdenuunivissie(ointEcHoegtitns,tuaNetyianhst)fehnslwyT;tofematiet)otfhrizlt(foehntu.AoeoieohUaSagr!t&nrllshc,pnsplasiOShtloeHrt,minhel)boeteiwi,esoeconeAarvdcatwTrsvievsruiaeni:taeeeniediit~nvdtmanqdvlceeidmuiitgeueeleso(cshm~reanisuneh,tviep)tvoaa.b.1yeomvresiimoyanahtesedrteoiusermoeaaimY,YniurTtaannefttoonpherrnefgfsuuaaeeeri,toodtrhnoseranlrwseadgvieiyet!tmisnfaieiJoqigiMmyovdnmdpnulupineoribelm;roeigaaetueodpnwsitpadreybdvrpe.dnaaoieeiiae(yluutiddvunedlrsesi)ne~sede:dnbieo.tte.d; AaircSsepochspocopfeorrooadrenrdlilsininmenian,egtuflosoyyDtrr,o,mrubitevFahmeteiira,dsoeyencSrareaatepiollvspcpepBekoduatunorlrpsbneeoyta,osuettCohstAohefeoy9onR5PWul2reyr1ige.s9isRo,otneneI~rsqan1f,luietyAW RshotieduengmsfitoaoteiwrrnnrenaeiAslndtRtdryDiaemsitgsrii<ivaeno2ctei0n.ts)iat~s~lrrfeaC.imOtceiedvfdd.faey1in•:cdJ~R>ea~re,irtmh.e7Jd}JayO3yB'sJr from the date of this response.

~k+K«·
FrBnc~sco J. Quintana, Warden

Date '

EXHIBIT 54 343

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 345 of 372 Page ID #:348
EXHIBIT 55

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 346 of 372 Page ID #:349
{ 1.~. IJt>parhatt·nt uf Ju.,tin~

1-., p..: 111 u-...: h.tll-ptHnl 1•en It .t!Lii..'hmt.::nh ctr..· 'll"edeJ. -.uhmtt tnur l·ur1~·~ ( )ne ~.-·npy 1)f th~.-· Cu1npt....·ted BP-~2'li 1.~) tnlluJtnt! ,W\ .ltUd11111.."111'1 tntl:-.r hl' '>Uhtnli!L'J \'. Hh 1hl'> .tppl':d

f f(ll1l

Bryant, David D.
I \Sf N.\ \IE. 1\RST. \IILl!lLL INITIAL

06 704-016

1':-.:IT

USP Victorville IC<\ f!Tl' Til JN

Part A· REASO~ FOR APPEAL

I submitted the attached BP-9, dated April 1, and submitted a BP-10 before I received the attached late response to my BP-9. Even though I properly submitted the BP-10 on Nay 4, 2010, I am submitting this additional BP-10.
I am a deaf inmate and I connnunicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I do not connnunicate effectively in written or spoken English and have been seeking accommodations for my disability. To that end, I was working through the BOP's administrative remedy process when I was transferred from USP Coleman I to USP Victorville. I believe this transfer was retaliatory and done to try to frustrate my ccmpletion of the remedy process. The transfer has not remedied my need for accommodations and was an attempt to frustrate my use of the remedy process and my ability to communicate with my attorneys.
I request that my previous grievance processes be allowed to go forward and that I not be transferred again Juring the remedy process. Also, because the transfer has not remedied my need for accommodations, I request the same relief I was seeking before I was transferred. I request (a) working hearing aid batteries on an as needed basis; (b) safe access to closed-captioning TV; (c) a qualified ASL interpreter to enable me to communicate with COs, medical staff, mental healthcare workers, pharmacists, education and vocational instructors, and work supervisors; and (d) a vibrating pager to alert me to prison alarms and other announcements. The Warden's response does not adequately address these needs for accommodation.

DArE
Part 8 ·RESPONSE

IJAIE

~E(;(ONAL DIRECIOR

If di'>-,.J.ll'\ft~Ll \\lth tht~ ,.._...,pun"~. you may .tppc... l to tht:" ()l..'nt..?r•.d Counsi.!l. Ynur .1ppeal must be rece1v~d 1n 1he Cle-neral Counsel·.., Olficl! w1th111 JO t.: ..llcndar

~<~~-~ _f2ET~~-~ '_::_~~ 51?1:-~__I_ d,q.., of the: Jatc: uf th1s re'>pon-:.e.

___ - - _____ - - - ___ CASE NUMBER:_

IJ~

Part C · RECEIPT

CASE NUMBER:

Return lo: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1..\.', r NAME. ~lRS r..'-11DOI.E INITIAL

KUi. NO

liN IT

INSTI'n IT I< lN

\I :BJECT - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

lJSP l VN

1>-\IE

Sl(iNAITIRE. RECIPIENT IJF RECiiONAL APPEAL

BP-230{ 131 JJr-.iE 2:002

EXHIBIT 55 345

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 347 of 372 Page ID #:350

U.S. llEP.\RTMENT OF .IL:S'IH E
F(~dtral Bureau of Pn'ion:-.

REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

{Ype or u.H~ htdl -point pen. ~l dl1a•·hmcnn art! Ht>edcd, 'iuhmit jvur copies. Addittotwl instru(·rions 1 '" rtTt!rse.

t_):SP V1c. r.:tv 1tlc

From:_Bryant, David D.

06704-016

tJ!P Colenran ~

LAST ~AME. FIRST. 1\IIDOLE INITIAL

REG. NO.

l!'IIT

I ~S'IlTUTU )N

Part B- RESPONSE

c::~ (Jil)>
-o ,._

= ~
..,=
:Po

-<..c,
"- 1: z.
OVl
;oo <-.,

::Aj
..,CJ1
:::11:

'c,
f')
,'T';
,--.<,

;:::::; rn

<&

,::;

1""1, 0

1.0

flArE

WARDEN OR REGIONAL DIRECTOR

BS - L If Ji"ati•fied •·ith thi., rnponse. \'IIU may appeal itt the Ne~ionall>irntor. Your appeal lnU\'1 be reaived in The Re!(l'onaJ Office within 211 cale5 ~~"Sf;' gonse.

()1{!(;('1,/\L: REITRNTOINM.-\TE

CASE NUMBER:

--------------------------------------------------------------

Part C- RECEIPT

C \SE NIJ\HlFR: -----------------------

l<eturn lo

I ,-'\'il' '-iA\1F.. 1-IRS'f. \IlDDLE I:>;tTIAL

RE(i_ '10

I'NIT

INSTITuT!( JN

'1-'HIH- f: __ ·-~---

[lATE

iP-/2'-}1~1)
,,t-JRIL '':1t:2

EXHIBIT 55 346

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 348 of 372 Page ID #:351
Request for Administrative Remedy Case No.: 585748-Pl
TrpttsthrearhramaceeinnesveiAssivofidfreseumeedr1s:l71,nineo~ge.ynd3frotireeAruayvsaogppatwuaron1i7ivnncwlreseeee1sdr5Rseube,teromeeisnk2eeg~ya?edn1yloklg~0u~on.PhrwgearceRocdIacreoneetqmmstuoy3mteehod.soegyutdoraAfppto17sfrrooeroenrvrcqwAeieuoflasdeouirssmedr.stf,in,yaiinynoYsodyuoscuourtruitahtdsacutrlaiiasvestticoqeaoeubynoRreieupl.esimqtrcnuieyodyoeyorts'tutncbrroetohueygohur AVTAsRRyuooeedirbmuctgemmaretivldooiiiyAnnesrDswviadsNileiomtloaronOl.afiesfnntfi5efivyows7isnoects6eru.e3raMerR.4tei1aSrvmf-reiRSceielnqhdlpecuyRede1aeec8amrsiaeN,pteftpdoi2rdcyveep0ueaav1mreslleeusl0byva.obelia,nmroe,rduieYMrse2sosausy0pyipoo0ienuho8nn1a,ndss4vwsit, nenieaetgsi2rtunae0tetpr1idmoet0roesee.enepsvRdnsioieigo.mTncnAuasehaesdldecytsrmeduiednuNirifnnrtosoyeti.trosniet thts,5truelUt7ayatS5itit,PiSt6ouvo4nesta4uwsp-toohRRpfe•el.mEoa~aeerarnds:seyd,t and continue to be, addressed. VYvyi(nicooidu)uceotohaotrpaocdrvhceveoeprinslrssletiesop; o:teonc(cbo(ia)mcaf)lilmaocwrstauomeelnrlldiskeyc-ipancahtgarneoepdnqhwtieuoeoieattnhahsreictenedcsrdgetastaestanfhlifneedt;ohvurfbianoosnacuildetolgtomhnew(e;renia)inets(gstda.e} laovecnai-cbtoaqrymnauptmaeianlowsidg-frnaiiteeptiedoeadnrgesiednr{aTteTbttYorapUsrSa)iePslec;orertr.
MAEawbtawwihYi(wtahfanedndhaaoaitlcisam)imvnnteueetshcthsthadirhnrahaesgnabetto'teoeeTetteaeooetvafdhnndrtsdohoeewuehkhevnnhtnAbolwareobhetisaydncenpaspryeislekdturrtrshoaahatdihoibisaeanhannnslrovetlsdeegegpAoariTr2dE.daekdfedbT0Fon-agaefeqme,cuYorwrise.iveuAia,tdisr/hdcins2Veppscteoas0cNshatrnieaAimysdi1tooonoenoosee0lenndvsrylon(m,teoosuisaeosAnuauonftfrpyfdaiefnrSirlsfeoohwonoLnrtdacioruandetfbichrannhotsrbOteeiideygTrtiriadaoauvoadrssihlulltniuri;nierayietrlnnne-grdreooecnressmeetph(duaroeotsidbdqitaoratsdueq)eiucttlndenuuiivsisoe(itnoEcHgenittt,suaeNytinha)stfenhswly;Toetmfatiteolhtfrilzt(ofenhtuA.oeoieohUaaSgnrt&(rllsh,cpnsplasiOSht)oeHrm,tinhlelboteieiw,seooecnteAadvratwurvTseivsraeniitea:eenecidiitnvdtmnavdqcleiedumitiegoueeelsc(h~smrenasuinehw,itept)voaab.yo.emevrsiimonyaathreesdtieousermeoamai,YYinurTatanneftotopnehrrnegfsfuuaaeee,ritoodtnrhoseranrhwseagdviyetitUaminisfeiqoigimvMoydmdpunnulipneorebml;roieigaaeuodtpenwsitpadrebyvpdre.adneoiieaaie(tliyududvuneo.lress)ien:sedne:dbieo.tte.d;
AaircSsepohcspocopfeorrooadernrldlisininmeinan,egutfolsoyyDtrr,o,mrubitevfahmeetirdi,asoeyecnSraeraatepiollvspcpepBkeoduatunorlrpsbneeoyta,ousettCohstAohefeoy9onR5P~u2lreyer1igss.9iotR,oennerIwsqanf,luiteyAhWRsoitednuegmsfitoatoeiwrrnnreneaiAsnltdRtdryDiaemsigtrsi1i1vena2oeci0tntsi)as~t~lrrfeca.imOcteie,idvfdefeyn~i•c=ot~Rea~ir,ercmh'.e7JdyJ'ayo3yu8s r from the date of this response.

Franc~sco J. Quintana, Warden

Date

EXHIBIT 55 347

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 349 of 372 Page ID #:352
EXHIBIT 56

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 350 of 372 Page ID #:353

.S. ()t>partnH·nt of Ju ... tin~

Regicmal Administrative Remedy :\ ppeal

i yp~ llf tl"'-' h<tll-pntnl pl'n It ,l!f.Jt:hml'lll' Jrl' !H.·L'd-.:-d. "t~hmH four L'op!L"~ t )n~ cupy nf thL' cumpktL'J GP-22rl( 1.~) 11\Liudtn~ .J.H'I- .ltLILIHHCilh lllU<..t he ',1Jh!nllln1 '1.11h thl' .tppl.":..~l

Bryant, David D.

06704-016

USP Victorville

I \S r N,\\IF, IIRYf \IIUDLL INITIAL

RH; N<l

!'art A- REASO:\' FOR APPEAL

I submitted the attached BP-9, dated April 1, and submitted a BP-10 before I received the attached late response to my BP-9. Even though I properly submitted the BP-10 on May 4, 2010, I am submitting this additional BP-10.
I am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I do not communicate effectively in written or spoken English and have been seeking accommodations for my disability. To that end, I was working through the BOP's administrative remedy process when I was transferred from USP Coleman I to USP Victorville. I believe this transfer was retaliatory and done to try to frustrate my ccmpletion of the remedy process. The transfer has not remedied my need for accommodations and was an attempt to frustrate my use of the remedy process and my ability to communicate with my attorneys.
1 request that my previous grievance processes be allowed to go forward and that I not be transferred aga~n Juring the remedy process. Also, because the transfer has not remedied my need for accommodations, I request the same relief I was seeking before I was transferred. I request (a) working hearing aid batteries on an as needed basis; (b) safe ;lccess to closed-captioning TV; (c) a qualified ASL interpreter to enable me to communicate with COs, medical staff, mental healthcare workers, pharmacists, education and vocational instructors, and work supervisors; and (d) a vibrating pager to alert me to prison alarms and other announcements. The Warden's response does not adequately address these needs for accommodation.

Part B • RESPONSE

I! AI E

RE<;JONAL DIRECIOR

CASE NUMBER:

Retum

<o:

-

-

-

-

-L-.\:,-r :--lA- ME-. ll-RS-L

------.\11DDLE INITIAL

-

-

-

RFfi. NO

U~IT

I ~'iTITUTII lN

\I;BJFCT - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

tJSPIVN

II.\ IE

~I<;'IAl'IJRE, RECIPIENT OF REGIONAL APPEAL

8P·230( 13) JJNE 2002

EXHIBIT 56 349

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 351 of 372 Page ID #:354

585748-Rl FCC Victorville

BRYANT, David

06704-016

This is in response to your Regional Administrative Remedy Appeal of the Warden's decision dated May 4, 2010. You are requesting accommodations for your disability. In addition, you state your transfer was retaliatory and you request that you remain at this facility to complete the administrative remedy process.
A review of your request reveals you arrived at USP Victorville on t..Yarch 18, 2010. You stated you were transferred after you had submitted a remedy and before you received a response. Program Statement 1330.16, Administrative R~medy Program, requires the facility or regional office to complete the investigation and the response in a timely manner regardless if the inmate has left the institution or the region. To clarify, although you were transferred to another region, your remedies will be investigated and you will receive a response if they met the submission criteria.
The Warden's response addressed each issue you listed in your BP-9. We concur with the Warden's response. As a follow-up to your hearing aid concerns (b), Health Services notified you of your approval to have a consult with an Ear, Nose, and Throat Specialist. If you need batteries for your hearing aide, notify Health Services and you will receive those free of charge. Our review reveals the institution is meeting your needs.
This response is provided for informational purposes. If dissatisfied with this response, you may appeal to the Office of the General Counsel, Bureau of Prisons, 320 First Street, NW, Washington, DC 20534. Your appeal must be received in the General Counsel's Office within 30 calendar days of the date of this response.

EXHIBIT 56 350

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 352 of 372 Page ID #:355
EXHIBIT 57

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 353 of 372 Page ID #:356

U.S. Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Prisons

Central Office Administrative Remedy Appeal

Type or use ball-point pen. If altachments are needed. submit four copies. One copy each of the completed BP-229( 13) and BP-230( 13). including any attach-

ments must be submitted with this appeaL
From: 01''-\0A--1---, QA.~,J.

C(, 7U-1- 0/ fa

\.:~~ 1./.c_~u,((t_

LAST NAME. FIRST. MIDDLE INillAL

REG. NO.

UNIT

INSTITUTION

Part A · REASON FOR APPEAL I am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I do not communicate effectively in written or spoken English and have been seeking accommodations for my disability. To that end, I was working through the BOP's administrative remedy process when I was transferred from USP Coleman I to US? Victorville. I believe this transfer was retaliatory and done to tr; to frustrate ~y completion of the remedy process. The transfer has not remedied my need for accommodations and was an attempt to frustrate my use of the remedy process and my ability to communicate with my attorneys. Futhermore, my requests for accommodations at ~SP Victorville have been refused and my need for accommodations has not been remedied.

I request that my previous grievance processes be allowed to go forward and that I not be transferred again during the remedy process. Also, because the transfer has not remedied my need for accornQodations, I request the same relief I \laS seeking before I was transferred. I request (a) working hearing aid ~atteries on ~• an as
~q~I~=t='"" needed basis; (b) safe access to closed-captioning :V; (c) a qualified ASL inter?reter to enable me to
communicate with COs, medical staff, ~ental healthcare workers, pharmacists, education and vocational instructors, and '-"Ork supervisors; and (d) a vibrating pager to alert me to prison alarms and other announcements. The
'«Mo'• '"' ' " .•mom '"'""" >tmooo'o '"''""'" Oo

DATE Part 8 · RESPONSE

SIG A T i J R E O F R E Q U E S T E R

DATE ORIGINAL: RETIJRN TO INMATE
Part C • RECEIPT

GENERAL COUNSEL CASE NUMBER: CASE NUMBER:

Return to:---------------------------------------------
LAST NAME. FIRST. MIDDLE INITIAL

REG. NO.

CNIT

INSTITUTION

SUBJECT----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DATE

SIGNATURE OF RECIPIENT OF CENTRAL OFFICE APPEAL

BP·231(13)

EXHIBIT 57 352

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 354 of 372 Page ID #:357
Regional Administrative Remedy Appeal

: Y[h.: ()f fbL' h.dl-po!nt rt:n It d!LH:hn1~1H<, J.rt..' nL"~Lkd. -.uhrna lrlllr' (tlpll'~ "· ~•h thl"> .tppL':_d

[rnl\1

Bryant, David D.
I \Sf N,\\IE I IRST. \llllllLE INITI \L

{ )nt? cnry l)f th~..· cumpk"h.'J BP·]~ 1 )( ~-~) !tlliUd!n~ ..10~ .lti,IChnJCill'l IIHI:-.f Ill.' •.uhntii!CU

06 704-016

I :'-/IT

USP Victorville
I cj') fiTL' Ill lN

!'art A· REASO~ FOR AI'PEAL

1 submitted the attached BP-9, dated April 1, and submitted a BP-10 before I received the attached late response to my BP-9. Even though I properly submitted the BP-10 on t1ay 4, 2010, I am submitting this additional BP-10.
I am a deaf inmate and I communicate in American Sign Language ("ASL"). I do not communicate effectively in written or spoken English and have been seeking accommodations for my disability. To that end, I was working through the BOP's administrative remedy process when I was transferred from USP Coleman I to USP Victorville. I believe this transfer was retaliatory and done to try to frustrate my cGmpletion of the remedy process. The transfer has not remedied my need for accommodations and was an attempt to frustrate my use of the remedy process and my ability to communicate with my attorneys.
I request that my previous grievance processes be allowed to go forward and that I not be transferred aga~n during the remedy process. Also, because the transfer has not remedied my need for accommodations, I request the same relief I was seeking before I was transferred. I request (a) working hearing aid batteries on an as needed hasis; (b) safe access to closed-captioning TV; (c) a qualified ASL interpreter to enable me to communicate with COs, medical staff, mental healthcare workers, pharmacists, education and vocational instructors, and work supervisors; and (d) a vibrating pager to alert me to prison alarms and other announcements. The Warden's response does not adequately address these needs for accommodation.

llME l'art B • RESPONSE

IJAIE

HEGIONAL OIRECIOR

If d!'>~..ttl"t''ctl \\ 11h 1tns •~·..,pon-.c. you may ,tppcal to !he- <Jl'nl..""r..d Cnun'id Y(>ur .1ppeal mu"t be rt>-(eJvC"J in 1he (Jenera) C'nun~cl·, Otficl! With Ill -~0 <:Jkndar

/;',:',:;/~",::~·~~~,~~~'";~ I!:_~TE _

------ _

~lJMBER: - - - - - - - - C A S ! ! _

_

_51D:_~~~-

Part C - RECEIPT

CASE NUMBER:

Return

1u:

-

-

-

-

-

-

-L.\,',

-r :-'-/A-:'-.-IE,-fl-RS-T-. \--fi-DD-L:E

--::INITIAL

-

-

-

-

RLfi. NO

UNIT

I!'<;TITUTH lN

\t:BJFCT - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

lJSP LVN

f>MF.

:illi~AIURE. RECIPIENT I JF REGIONAL APPEAL

BP-230{ 13) JJNE 2002

EXHIBIT 57
353

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 355 of 372 Page ID #:358

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JliSTICE Federal Bureau nf l'n~mb

REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

From: _ _;,B~r"-"y_,a,.,n'"'-"t"''--'D=a'-'v'-~=·"'d,__,D'"'-".-------- 06704-016

L.~'iT NAME. ~-lll.ST, MJOOI.E ll'<ITIAL

REt;. NO.

11'011'

INSTlTUTION

!>art 8- RESPONSE

c:~ <JII:p.

="-) =

., :r.
-<,.c..·
::!z

;J:lOO
";;o
U1

',,
~·) .~1

0(.{1
:oo ;<:=--..,,
,r..-,M()

":X
'!!
0

,< ,
<..-:J

0..0

ORH;INA 1.: ltEITRN TO INMATE

Part C- RECEII'T

f{durn to:

1./\'iT NA:I.If. 1-IR~T. MIDDLE INITIAL

\I BIEC r

I>ATE

WARDEN <JR REGIONAL DIRECTClR

REG. NO

CASE :>JU\1BER: - - - - - · - - - - - -

I. NIT

INSTITUTI( IN

k~.CIPII·NT S <;IGNA f\IHE 1.) L\f·F Mf:Mill'Rl

:iP-.?29il1} ,~PPIL T'olf:l2

EXHIBIT 57 354

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 356 of 372 Page ID #:359

Request for Administrative Remedy Casa No.: 585748-Pl

TrpttstherrahraamceeinensveiAissvoiffrdesueeemdsr:l,ri1ineoegn.yndrf1oirseeAutayvrsgoappawuatron1i7inncvlwrseeeee1sdr5sReueb,teroemeisnk2eegy0aiednyl1oklg0uitonh.PrwgearceRocdIacreoneeqtmmstuoysemteho.dsogyeutdoraAfpptosrfrrioeoreonqrvrcwAeuieofalesdoiurssmedr.st,fi

niscracive Remedy you stace prior' to your
your disability tnrough , you request your and that you not be
You also request the institution.

AVTAsRRyaunooeeidrbmcdutgemamtreivolodciiiynAneorsDvwsaindsNilietotmlioaroOnnl.afeifsunntfie5efiovyw7sisnoecst6etru.oer3aMerR.4tebi1arSmvfer-eicSRei,elqnhdplecuyRaede1eadeca6smrdia,pNetfrepteodi2rcdyevsep0uaesav1mreeslleesl0udbyva.ob.el,ianmreo,rdueYiMrse2sosayus0pyipo0oieunho6nn1a,nds4swvsit,neineaetgsir2tunea0tetrp1idomet0roesee.enepsRvdnsioeiig.omnTcnAusaehaeldsdeCtysmrediueduniNifrnntosroytie.trositenthts,5truUetl7aaytS5tiitP,iS~6ouvo4nestau4wsp-toohRRpfe•el>mEa~eaerarndsesy,dt

VYviy(noicoidu)uceotohaortpaodcrvhceveoeprinsrlstselieops; o:teoncc(bo(i)acmaf)lilmoacwrsatuomeelnrlldikseyc-ipancathgarneoepdqnhwtiueeooieattnhahsreitcenedcsrdgetastaetasnfhlifneed;tohvurbfianoosnacuildetlogtomhnew(e;renia)inet(sgstda.e)

accommodations at USP le-typewriter (TTY ) or on an as-needed basis;
a qualified interpreter vibrating pager to alerc

MEAawbtawwiYh(iawth:fnedndahaaaoitlsicam)ivmntenueetshcthsthaidrhnrahaesgnabteot'toeeeeTtteaeooetvafnhdndrtsdohoeewuehkhevnnhtAbnolwroaehbesatiyncdenppyarseislekdturtrrshaoathadhiiboiesahanannnslroevtldseegegpAoariTr2dE.deakdefdbTF0on-aagefeqme,cuYorriwse.iveuiA,tdais/rdchni2sVeppscteoas0csNhatrineaAmiysd1tioonooeonsoee0lendnvsryolmn(,teosoiusaeosAnauuontffpryfadiefnSrrilefsohoownLontdraciourdnateifbchrannhotsOrbteeideiygTtriiradoaauovdarssihlulltinuri;nireayirtenlnne·grrodeoecnressmteepdh(auroeostidbqdtiaroadtsueq)euicttldneunuisvsiie(ointEHcogetnits,tuaNetiyahns)tfehnlswyT;otefmaciet)otfrizlht(foehntu.AooieeohUaaSgr~&n(rllsc,phnsplisaOSh)toeHrntm,ilhebletoeiw,ieoseocneAadrvtarwtTvseivrsueina~ie:aeeniediti~tnvdmnaqvdlceueidmiitgeueelseoc(thsmrenaiusnieh,wtept)voaoa.b.yemversiinmoayathreedsteiousermoaeamiY,YnuirTatannefttoonpehrrnefgfsuuaaeee,irtoodtrnhoseranrhwseagdvieyit!taminisfeqioJigimvMyodmdpnnulupineorblemi;roeiagaceuoepdnwsitpadreybdvrpe.daenoaeiiiea(lyiduutdvunedlres)isen!sed:endbieo.tte.d;

AaiCrSsepchospcoopfeorrooarednrldlisiinmnienan,egutflosoyyDtrr,o,mrubietvFahmeteiri,adsoeyencSraeraatepiollvspcpepBekoduatunorlrpsbneeoyta,ousettCohstAohefeoy9onR5PWul2reyr1iges.9isoR,otneneIwrsqanf,luiteyhAW RsoitednuegmsfitoaoteiwrrnnrenaeiAslntdRtdryiDaemsitgsrii(ivaen2oc~e0intsi)a~ts~lrrfeac.1maOteiievf~ddfneyYiawc:·~eRairr,tehmce7Jdy']ayo3y•.6s1r from the date of this response.

~i4-A<A·

Fr~nclsco J. Quintana, Warden

Date

EXHIBIT 57 355

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 357 of 372 Page ID #:360

585748-R1 FCC Victorville

BRYANT, David

06704-016

This is in response to your Regional Administrative Remedy Appeal of the Warden's decision dated May 4, 2010. You are requesting accommodations for your disability. In addition, you state your transfer was retaliatory and you request that you remain at this facility to complete the administrative remedy process.
A review of your request reveals you arrived at USP Victorville on March 18, 2010. You stated you were transferred after you had submitted a remedy and before you received a response. Program Statement 1330.16, Administrative Remedy Program, requires the facility or regional office to complete the investigation and the response in a timely manner regardless if the inmate has left the institution or the region. To clarify, although you were transferred to another region, your remedies will be investigated and you will receive a response if they met the submission criteria.
The Warden's response addressed each issue you listed in your BP-9. We concur with the Warden' s response. As a follow- up to your hearing aid concerns (b), Health Services notified you of your approval to have a consult with an Ear, Nose, and Throat Specialist. If you need batteries for your hearing aide, notify Health Services and you will receive those free of charge. Our review reveals the institution is meeting your needs.
This response is provided for informational purposes. If dissatisfied with this response, you may appeal to the Office of the General Counsel, Bureau of Prisons, 320 First Street, NW, Washington, DC 20534. Your appeal must be received in the General Counsel's Office within 30 calendar days of the date of this response.

EXHIBIT 57 356

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 358 of 372 Page ID #:361
EXHIBIT 58

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 359 of 372 Page ID #:362

_____,.J
0 (
~"-(-/\-]>,

co
I()

co!:: Cf) 1.{)

~ -

C')

111

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 360 of 372 Page ID #:363
-'

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 361 of 372 Page ID #:364
EXHIBIT 59

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 362 of 372 Page ID #:365

SoN orJ .e_
;4 tJuk

8-rf-;v
b~fft d 7/!l1e /J1CJ5jJ
o;J (o4

.L S'vt (r) (0'1 _~<t J
.;1 ~ ---60 ~ s-J+L(,

~;r:5 . -0\q;

•• < -r- ..

t 1\Jfsk 50+-e >t-,

·I

I

•7+

evvJ f,;··t·9~Fot/,0'lJY-f-:LN >6 -~ :L N~N<cJrcfcL_ ~~ 'tr/i""'!.-!t:ft,-vs+hu_5(y__

..
.

;.T0o---U)zvcr{:-Zcft_l~fAi-(1~

wt4:;, ~;r/-ot

No--r€_
fJ/_a_fi/Je__

ffa{J~MUc~!c:u5

.+f..r;ff-1 ':I.-.t'/6"/W~"I!; o ~ ~SAV(

·:b~f Lrc -/-<::> lfbavd- ~ Sl5

~ I

~y; 5 s f--_ t; f,:, c ke (_jv

-, y L D V\

EXHIBIT 59 361

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 363 of 372 Page ID #:366
EXHIBIT 60

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 364 of 372 Page ID #:367
125 BROAD STREET NEW YORK, N.Y. 10004-2499
August 1 , 2010
Via U.S. Mail
Warden Francisco J. Quintana USP VICTORVILLE U.S. PENITENTIARY P.O. BOX 5400 Adelanto, CA 92301
Re: Inmate David Bryant, 06704-016
Dear Warden Quintana:
I represent David Bryant, Register Number 06704-01 and am writing to express my continuing concerns with USP Victorville's failure to ace mmodate Mr. Bryant's deafness. Mr. Bryant's placement in the Special Hous· Unit (the "SHU") where he has significantly reduced privileges from both the general p pulation and compared to other hearing inmates in the SHU, is very troubling- es ially considering that his placement in the SHU appears to be the result of the prison's hllure to provide Mr. Bryant with a qualified American Sign Language ("ASL") interp eter.
As you know from previous letters from me and my c lleagues and the administrative remedy forms Mr. Bryant has filed, Mr. Bryant is de He communicates in ASL, a language of hand signals that is distinct and different from nglish, and, therefore, he does not communicate effectively in written English. A ditionally, he requires a teletypewriter ("TTY") to communicate via telephone. en my colleague Andrew Gelfand and I visited Mr. Bryant on July 25, 20I0, we learn that Mr. Bryant had been placed in the SHU on or around July 23, 2010. To my kno ledge, Mr. Bryant is still in the SHU, where, amongst other general privilege restrictio , he has no access to a TTY despite the fact that hearing prisoners in the same position ave access to telephones. Mr. Bryant did not- and still does not- know why hew put in the SHU.
Mr. Gelfand spoke with Counselor Ferguson on July 2 , 2010, to determine why Mr. Bryant was put in the SHU. Counselor Ferguson old Mr. Gelfand to speak to Unit Manager Tipton. On July 29, 2010, Unit Manager Tipt n told Mr. Gelfand that if Mr. Bryant signed a release form, Unit Manager Tipton would en be able to
provide Mr. Gelfand information regarding Mr. Bryant's placement· the SHU. Mr. Gelfand followed Unit Manager Tipton's instructions and sent a release for
Mr. Bryant's signature on July 30,2010.
EXHIBIT 60 363

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 365 of 372 Page ID #:368

Warden Francisco J. Quintana

-2-

After receiving the requested release form, however, nit Manager Tipton told Mr. Gelfand on August 6, 2010, that there was a "misunderstan g" because he could not deal with attorneys, nor provide updates on Mr. Bryant's s tus. Unit Manager Tipton also said that Mr. Bryant "knows why he is in the SHU" beca e Mr. Bryant writes and reads lips "very well" and that he could write to his attorn ys to tell us why he is in the SHU. Mr. Gelfand reminded Unit Manager Tipton that Mr. ryant did not know why he was in the SHU when we visited him on July 25, 2010. Mr. elfand also reminded Unit Manager Tipton that it was Unit Manager Tipton's su gestion to have Mr. Bryant sign the release form. Unit Manager Tipton agreed to follow p with Mr. Bryant to see if he consented to the release of this information. To date, we ave not heard further from Unit Manager Tipton.
Mr. Bryant recently sent me by mail a set ofhandwritt n notes passed between himself and Unit Manager Tipton. These notes are dated A gust 6, 2010 - the same date on which we had our last communication with Unit M r Tipton in which he informed Mr. Gelfand that Mr. Bryant writes and reads lips "very ell." I am attaching these handwritten notes as they clearly demonstrate that Mr Bryant does not communicate effectively in written English. In this handwritten exc ge, Unit Manager Tipton attempted to ask Mr. Bryant if Mr. Bryant had asked to be pl ed in the SHU "for [his] own protection." When Mr. Bryant denied making such a reque Unit Manager Tipton told Mr. Bryant that he was in the SHU "under a Protective C ody Investigation" and that he would tell his superiors that Mr. Bryant "w t[s] to go to Compound."
From these notes, it appears that USP Victorville is un er the mistaken impression that Mr. Bryant requested to be put in the SHU for his o protection. This is but the latest instance of a troubling trend at USP Victorville and oth federal prisons in which Mr. Bryant has been incarcerated. Mr. Bryant requests the a mmodations which he is due under the law for his deafness, and the prison responds by p tting him in the SHU, denying him access to his attorneys, and wrongly claiming that his deafness is not a barrier to communication. This latest apparent miscommunication w uld never have occurred ifthe prison had provided Mr. Bryant a qualified ASL inte reter to communicate with prison staff as required under the Rehabilitation A t.
I again request that Mr. Bryant be provided with a q · ed ASL interpreter to help him communicate with prison staff and the other r nable accommodations to which he is entitled under the Act. Mr. Bryant's eafness is a significant and real barrier to communication, and he should not be s bjected to unjust punishment in the SHU because the prison refuses to provide him the reasonable accommodations the law requires. In addition, if he has not already en moved, Mr. Bryant should be moved to the general population as soon as pos ible.

EXHIBIT 60 364

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 366 of 372 Page ID #:369

Warden Francisco J. Quintana

-3-

I am available by telephone, (212) 558-1632, email, fitzwaterm@sullcrom.com, or facsimile, (212) 291-9282, at any time to discuss this issue, including Mr. Bryant's ongoing need of accommodations for h s deafuess.

(Enclosure)
cc: Gen. Counsel Kathleen M. Kenney Office of General Counsel 320 1st St., NW, 7th Floor Washington, D.C. 20534
Associate Gen. Counsel Paul W. Layer Office of General Counsel 320 1st St., NW, 7th Floor Washington, D.C. 20534
Harlan Penn, Regional Counsel Western Regional Office 7338 Shoreline Drive Stockton, CA 95219

EXHIBIT 60 365

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 367 of 372 Page ID #:370
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT TO UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE FOR DISCOVERY
This case has been assigned to District Judge Mariana P. Pfaelzer and the assigned discovery Magistrate Judge is David T. Bristow. The case number on all documents filed with the Court should read as follows:
CVll- 254 MRP (DTBx)
Pursuant to General Order 05-07 of the United States District Court for the Central District of California, the Magistrate Judge has been designated to hear discovery related motions.
The United States District Judge assigned to this case will review all filed discovery motions and thereafter, on a case-by-case or motion-by-motion basis, may refer discovery related motions to the Magistrate Judge for hearing and determination

NOTICE TO COUNSEL

A copy of this notice must be served with the summons and complaint on all defendants (if a removal action is filed, a copy of this notice must be served on all plaintiffs). Subsequent documents must be filed at the following location:

[X] Western Division
312 N. Spring St., Rm. G-8 Los Angeles, CA 90012

U Southern Division

U Eastern Division

411 West Fourth St., Rm. 1-053

3470 Twelfth St., Rm. 134

Santa Ana, CA 92701-4516

Riverside, CA 92501

Failure to file at the proper location will result in your documents being returned to you.

CV-18 (03/06)

NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT TO UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE FOR DISCOVERY

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 368 of 372 Page ID #:371

AdamS. Paris (SBN 190693) Rory P. Culver (SBN 271868) 1888 Century Park East Los Angeles, California 90067 Tel.: (310) 712-6600; Fax: (310) 712-8800

David Bryant

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CASE NUMBER

PLAINTIFF(S)
V.
U.S. Bureau of Prisons, Harley G. Lappin, Robert E. McFadden, and Francisco J. Quintana, in their official capacities
DEFENDANT(S).

CVll

0254 MRP (D\Bx)
SUMMONS

TO: DEFENDANT(S): United States Bureau of Prisons, Harley G. Lappin, Robert E. McFadden, and Francisco J. Quintana A lawsuit has been filed against you.
jyo0mu1ord8uucm8gsro8mtouastCnneeionsteWrewvntnreitbcemtuylhrorauinyodinsmrettPhfmbaa0eeruo6kplts0ctileEorawronaivnsiselswdttl,-diaficbLytfolhesaoaninsetamhtnfhAaettenoeencrsrrpgoewsaeludealermreiartvns.got,itoacitCifieotfnah'nossletifuafyatotnhtotrtdoinuasreicnrfashoeuRe9yrmdu0,t0lhmMeA6eo71drcn2eoaslmmoioefpnSftl.dhyaeePionmauFtrae(i0snnddoeretadcloiRnuuntlhteiensgcootfhmCepidvlaaiailynmPty.reoonYucd.eeordIedufucycwraeeoolihs.vmuooepdsfTmealhiaiutlaie)snd,ttoatdyfnrodiesluoewssseoirs,

Dated:------------

Clerk, U.S. District Court

(Seal ofthe Court)

[Use 60 60 days

days ifthe defendant
by Rule 12(a)(3)].

is

the

United

States

or

a

United

States

agency,

or

is

an

officer

or

employee

ofthe

1181 United States.

Allowed

CV.()IA (12/07)

SUMMONS

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 369 of 372 Page ID #:372

)

ADAMS. PARt~ tSBN
~arisa(a)~ullcrom.com

190693)

20RY. COLVER (SBN 271868)

culverr(tUsullcrom.com
3 1888 Century Park East, Suite 21 00

Los Angeles, California 90067

4 Tel.:

(310) 712-6600

Fax:

(310) 712-8800

5

DEBORAH GOLDEN (oro hac vice application forthcoming)

6 Deborah Golden@waslilaw.org

7

Washingfon La~ers' Cotruruttee for
II Dupont Circle, N.W/ Suite 400

Civil

Rights

and

Urban

Affairs

Washmgton, DC 2003o

8 Tel.:

(202) 319-1000

Fax:

(202)319-1010

9

(Additional Counsel Listed on Signature Page] 10

Attorneys for PlaintiffDavid Bryant I 1

12

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

13

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

14 DAVID BRYANT,
15 16

Plaintiff,

Case No. COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE REHABILITATION ACT AND VIOLATIONS OF THE FIRS}',_.,.FI~ AND EIGHTH AME.NuMENI·S

COMPLAINT

CONFORMED Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 370 of 372 Page ID #:373 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL COVER SHEET

I (a) PLAINTIFFS (Check box if you are representing yourselfO) DAVID BRYANT

DEFENDANTS see attached

(b) Attorneys (Finn Name, Address and Telephone Number. If you are ~presenting yourself, provide same.) see attached

Attorneys (If Known)

II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an X in one box only.)

0 I U.S. Government Plaintiff

0 3 Federal Question (U.S. Government Not a Party)

r£2 U.S. Government Defendant 0 4 Diversity (Indicate Citizenship
of Parties in Item Ill)

Ill.

CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES- For Diversity (Place an X in one box for plaintiff and one for defendant.)

Cases

Only

Citizen of This State Citizen of Another State

PTF DEF OJ OJ Incorporated or Principal Place
of Business in this State
02 02 Incorporated and Principal Place of Business in Another State

PTF 04
05

DEF 04
05

IV. ORIGIN (Place an X in one box only.)

Citizen O£ Subject of a Fo~ign Country 0 3 0 3 Foreign Nation

06 06

~I Original
Proceeding

0 2 Removed fiom State Court

0 3 Remanded fiom Appellate Court

0 4 Reinstated or Reopened

0 5 Transfe=d from another district (specify):

0 6 MultiDistrict

0 7 Appeal to District Judge from

V. REQUESTED IN COMPLAINT: JURY DEMAND: 'fives 0 No (Check 'Yes' only if demanded in complaint.)

Litigation

Magistrate Judge

CLASS ACTION under F.R.C.P. 23: 0 Yes rfNo

0 MONEY DEMANDED IN COMPLAINT: S

VI.

CAUSE OF ACTION (Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing and write a brief statement of cause. 29 U.S.C. § 794, violations of constitutional and statutory rights of federal prison inmate with deafuess

Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity.)

VII. NATURE OF SUIT (Place au X in oae box only.)

SEctJRm' OTHERSTATIITES

CONTRACT

0400 State Reapportionment OliO Insurance

0410 Antitrust

0120 Marine

0430 Banks and Banking

0130 Miller Act

0450 Commerce/ICC

0140 Negotiable Instrument

Rates/etc.

0150 Recovery of

0 460 Deportation

Overpayment &

0470 Racketeer Influenced

Enforcement of

and Corrupt

Judgment

Organizations

0151 Medicare Act

0480 Consumer C~dit 0490 Cable/Sat TV 0810 Selective Service

0152 Recovery of Defaulted Student Loan (Excl. Veterans)

0 850 Securities/Commodities/ 0153 Recovery of

Exchange

Overpayment of

0875

Customer Challenge 12
usc 3410

Veteran's Benefits 0160 Stockholders' Suits

0890 Other Statutory Actions 0190 Other Contract

0891 Agricultural Act

0195 Contract Product

0 892 Economic Stabilization

Liability

Act

0 196 Franchise

0 893 Environmental Matters

- REALPROPERTY.

0894 Energy Allocation Act 0210 Land Condemnation

0895 Freedom of Info. Act 0220 Foreclosure

0 '100 Appeal of Fee Detenni- 0230 Rent Le35e & Ejectment

nation Under Equal

0240 Torts to Land

Access to Justice 0950 Constitutionality of
State Statutes

0245 Tort Product Liability 0 290 All Other Real Property

TORTS
PERSONAL INJURY 0310 Airplane 0315 Airplane Product
Liability 0320 Assault, Libel &
Slander 0330 Fed. Employers'
Liability 0340 Marine 0345 Marine Product
Liability 0350 Motor Vehicle 0355 Motor Vehicle
Product Liability 0360 Other Personal
lnjwy 0362 Personal Injury-
Med Malpractice 0365 Personal lnjwy-
Product Liability 0368 Asbestos Personal
Injury Product Liability
IMMIGRAnON ' ·' 0462 Naturalization
Application 0463 Habeas Corpus-
Alien Detainee 0465 Other Immigration

"

• TORTS

PRI'SONEI\.'.'

... LABOR .

~~

PERSONAL

:; PETITIONS;,_. : 0710 Fair Labor Standards

PROPERTY

0510 Motions to

Act

0370 Other Fraud

Vacate Sentence 0720 Labor/Mgmt.

0 371 Truth in Lending

Habeas Corpus

Relations

0380 Other Personal 0 530 General

0730 Labor/Mgmt.

Property Damage 0 535 Death Penalty

Reporting &

0 385 Property Damage 0540 Mandamus/

Disclosure Act

Product Liability BANKRUPTCY· ;

~550

Other Civil Rights

0740 Railway Labor Act 0 790 Other Labor

0 422 Appeal 28 USC 0 555 Prison Condition

Litigation

158
0423 Withdrawal 28
usc !57
' . CIVILRIGHTS 0441 Voting

. FORFEI1iJRE/, . 0791 Empl. Ret. Inc.

PENALTY'":'t . ,

Security Act

0 610 Agriculture

PROPERTY RIGHTS

l 0620 Other Food& 0 820 Copyrights

Drug

0 830 Patent

0442 Employment

0625 Drug Related

0443 Housing/Acco-

Seizure of

0 840 Trademark
sbc!At.

nunodations 0444 Welfare

Property 21 USC 0861 HIA (1395ff)

881

0862 Black Lung (923)

0445 American with 0630 Liquor Laws

0 863 DlWCIDIWW

Disabilities - 0640 R.R. & Truck

(405(g))

Employment

0650 Airline Regs

0446 American with 0660 Occupational

0864 SSID Title XVI 0 865 RSI (405(g))

Disabilities Other 0440 OtberCivil

Safety /Health 0690 Other

FEDERAL TAX SUITS .!
0 870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff or Defendant)

Rights

0871 IRS-Third Party 26

Actions

usc 7609

FOR OFFICE USE ONLY:

CVll 0254
Case Number.----------------------------------------------------------

AFTER COMPLETING THE FRONT SIDE OF FORM CV-71, COMPLETE THE INFORMATION REQUESTED BELOW.

CV-71 (05/08)

CIVIL COVER SHEET

Page I of 2

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 371 of 372 Page ID #:374

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL COVER SHEET

VIII( a). IDENTICAL CASES: Has this action b«n previously filed in this court and dismissed, remanded occlosed1 rfNo 0 Yes If yes, list case number(s): - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Vlll(b). RELATED CASES: Have any cases b«n previously filed in this court that are related to the present case? MNo 0 Yes If yes, list case number(s): - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Civil cases are deemed related If a previously filed case and the present case:

(Check all boxes that apply)

0 A. Arise from the same or closely related transactions, happenings, or events; O£ 0 B. Call for detennination ofthe same O£ substantially related or similar questions of law and fact; or 0 C. For other reasons would entail substantial duplication of labor if heard by different judges; or
0 D. Involve the same patent. trademark or copyright, .!!!2 one of the factors identified above in a, b or c also is present.

IX. VENUE: (When completing the following information, use an additional sheet if necessary.)

(a) 0

List Che

the County in this District; C ck here if the Rovernment, its

alifornia County outside of agencies O£ employees is a

this nam

District; Sta ed plaintiff.

te if other than California; If this box is checked, go

or Foreign Country, to item (b).

in

which

EACH

named

plaintiff resides.

County in this District:• San Bernardino

California County outside of this District; State. if other than California; or Foreign Country

i;> List the County in this District; California County outside of this District; State Check here if the government its agencies or employees is a named defendant.

ifother than California; or Foreign Country, If this box is checked, go to item (c).

in

which

EACH

named

defendant

resides.

County in this District:•

California County outside ofthis District; State, if other than California; or Foreign Country

(c)

list the County in this District; California County outside of this District; State if other
'Note· In land condemnation cases' use the location of the tract of land lnvolntl

than

California;

or

Foreign

Country,

in

which

EACH

claim

arose.

County in this District:• San Bernardino

California County outside of this District; State, if other than California; or Foreign Country

----- • Los
Note:

Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, Ventnra, Santa Barbara, In land condemnation cases. use the location of the tract ofli\11,11 involved

or

San

Lui~Oblspo

Counties

X. SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY (OR PRO PER): ----,--·:.,-l.:..,/-/"-U...._'""-1'\f:....·--.......,.---''""l.- - - Date _ _ _ _ _.._'_'_;_....__.1_- ' - - - - - - - - -

boNurotottiihcseeurtsopeadCpbeoyrustnhassedrC/ePlqeaurriktrleoedfsbt:hyelTCahwoe.uCrTtVhfo-is7r1ftoh(neJnSp,-ua4rp4pp)orsCoeviovefidlsbCtayotitvsheteircJSsu,hdveieecntiaualenCdaontnhdfeienirnietfnioacrteminoagfttithohene

contained herein neither replace nor supplement the tiling and service ofpleadings
cUivniilteddocSktaettesshieneSt.e(pFteomr mbeorre19d7e4ta, iilserdeqinusitrreudctpiuornssu,asnetetsoeLpaorcaatleRinuslteru3-c1tioisnns osthfeielet.d)

Key to Statistical codes relating to Social Security Cases:

Nature or Suit Code Abbreviation

Substantive Statement of Cause of Action

861

HIA

All claims for health Also, include claims program. (42 U.S.C.

insurance benefits (Medicare) under Title 18, Part A, of the by hospitals, skilled nursing facilities, etc., foc certification 1935FF(b))

Social Security Act, as as providers of services

amended. under the

862

BL

All (30

claims for "Black
u.s.c. 923)

Lung"

benefits

under

Title

4,

Part

B,

of

the

Federal

Coal

Mine

Health

and

Safety

Act

of

1969.

863

DIWC

All claims tiled by insured workers for disability insurance benefits under Title amended; plus all claims tiled for child's insurance benefits based on disability.

2 of (42

the Social Security U.S.C. 405(g))

Act,

as

863

DIWW

All claims filed for widows or widowers Act, as amended. (42 U.S.C. 405(g))

insurance

benefits

based

on

disability

under

Title

2

of

the

Social

Security

864

SSID

All claims for supplemental Act, as aniended.

security

income

payments

based

upon

disability

tiled

under

Title

16

of the

Social

Security

865

RSI

All claim$ for
u.s.c. (g))

retirement

(old

age)

and

survivO£S

benefits

under

Title

2

of

the

Social

Security

Act,

as

amended.

(42

CV-71 (05/08)

CIVIL COVER SHEET

Page 2 of2

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 372 of 372 Page ID #:375

ATTACHMENT TO CIVIL COVER SHEET

DEFENDANTS

UNITED STATES BUREAU OF PRISONS, HARLEY G. LAPPIN, Director ofthe United

States Bureau of Prisons, ROBERT E. Bureau of Prisons Western Region, and

MCFADDEN, FRANCISCO

Regional Director of the J. QUINTANA, Warden

United ofUSP

States

Victorville

ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF ADAMS. PARIS (SBN 190693) parisa@sullcrom.com
RORY P. CULVER (SBN 271868) culverr@sullcrom.com
1888 Century Park East Los Angeles, California 90067 Tel.: (310) 712-6600 Fax: (310)712-8800

DEBORAH GOLDEN (pro hac vice application forthcoming) Deborah_Golden@washlaw.org Washington Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs 11 Dupont Circle, N.W., Suite 400 Washington, DC 20036 Tel.: (202) 319-1000 Fax: (202) 319-1010

MATTHEW S. FITZWATER (pro hac vice application forthcoming) fi tzwaterm@sullcrom. com TIMOTHEA G.P. LETSON (pro hac vice application forthcoming) letsont@sullcrom.com 125 Broad Street 32nd Floor
New York, New York I0004-2498 Tel.: (212) 558-4000 Fax: (212) 558-3588

 
 Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 32 Filed 07/11/11 Page 1 of 7 Page ID #:738
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Case No. Title

CV11-254 CAS (DTBx)

Date July 11, 2011

DAVID BRYANT v. UNITED STATES BUREAU OF PRISONS, ET AL.

Present: The Honorable CHRISTINA A. SNYDER

CATHERINE JEANG

LAURA ELIAS

N/A

Deputy Clerk

Court Reporter / Recorder

Tape No.

Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs:

Attorneys Present for Defendants:

Adam Paris Rory Culver Andrew Gelfand Matthew Fitzwater Deborah Golden

Monica Miller Chung Han

Proceedings:

DEFENDANT UNITED STATES BUREAU OF PRISONS’ MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE REHABILITATION ACT AND VIOLATIONS OF THE FIRST, FIFTH, AND EIGHTH AMENDMENTS (filed 05/31/11)

I. INTRODUCTION
On January 7, 201,1 plaintiff filed a complaint for violations of the Rehabilitation Act as well as the first, fifth, and eighth amendments against the United States Bureau of Prisons, Harley G. Lappin in his official capacity as Director of the United States Bureau of Prisons, Robert E. McFadden, in his official capacity as Regional Director of the United States Bureau of Prisons Western Region, and Francisco J. Quintana, in his official capacity as Warden of USP Victorville (collectively, “defendants”). On May 31, 2011, defendants filed a motion to dismiss, followed immediately on the same day with an amended motion to dismiss. On June 20, 2011, plaintiff filed his opposition to defendants’ motion to dismiss. On June 27, 2011 defendants filed their reply. Having carefully considered the parties’ arguments, the Court finds and concludes as follows.

CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 1 of 7

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 32 Filed 07/11/11 Page 2 of 7 Page ID #:739
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Case No. Title

CV11-254 CAS (DTBx)

Date July 11, 2011

DAVID BRYANT v. UNITED STATES BUREAU OF PRISONS, ET AL.

II. LEGAL STANDARD

A Rule 12(b)(6) motion tests the legal sufficiency of the claims asserted in a complaint. “While a complaint attacked by a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss does not need detailed factual allegations, a plaintiff’s obligation to provide the ‘grounds’ of his ‘entitlement to relief’ requires more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do.” Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007). “Factual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level.” Id. Stated differently, only a complaint that states a claim for relief that is “plausible on its face” survives a motion to dismiss. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 1949-50 (2009) (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570). “The plausibility standard is not akin to the ‘probability requirement,’ but it asks for more than a sheer possibility that a defendant has acted unlawfully.” Id.

In considering a motion pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), a court must accept as true all material allegations in the complaint, as well as all reasonable inferences to be drawn from them. Pareto v. F.D.I.C., 139 F.3d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1998). The complaint must be read in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party. Sprewell v. Golden State Warriors, 266 F.3d 979, 988 (9th Cir. 2001); Parks Sch. of Bus., Inc. v. Symington, 51 F.3d 1480, 1484 (9th Cir. 1995). However, a court need not accept as true unreasonable inferences or conclusory legal allegations cast in the form of factual allegations. Sprewell, 266 F.3d at 988; W. Mining Council v. Watt, 643 F.2d 618, 624 (9th Cir. 1981).

Dismissal pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) is proper only where there is either a “lack of a cognizable legal theory or the absence of sufficient facts alleged under a cognizable legal theory.” Balistreri v. Pac. Police Dept., 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1990).

Furthermore, unless a court converts a Rule 12(b)(6) motion into a motion for

summary judgment, a court cannot consider material outside of the complaint (e.g., facts

presented in briefs, affidavits, or discovery materials). In re American Cont’l

Corp./Lincoln Sav. & Loan Sec. Litig., 102 F.3d 1524, 1537 (9th Cir. 1996), rev’d on

other grounds sub nom Lexecon, Inc. v. Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach, 523

U.S. 26 (1998). A court may, however, consider exhibits submitted with or alleged in the

CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 2 of 7

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 32 Filed 07/11/11 Page 3 of 7 Page ID #:740
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Case No. Title

CV11-254 CAS (DTBx)

Date July 11, 2011

DAVID BRYANT v. UNITED STATES BUREAU OF PRISONS, ET AL.

complaint and matters that may be judicially noticed pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 201. In re Silicon Graphics Inc. Sec. Litig., 183 F.3d 970, 986 (9th Cir. 1999); Lee v. City of Los Angeles, 250 F.3d 668, 689 (9th Cir. 2001).

For all of these reasons, it is only under extraordinary circumstances that dismissal is proper under Rule 12(b)(6). United States v. City of Redwood City, 640 F.2d 963, 966 (9th Cir. 1981).

As a general rule, leave to amend a complaint which has been dismissed should be freely granted. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a). However, leave to amend may be denied when “the court determines that the allegation of other facts consistent with the challenged pleading could not possibly cure the deficiency.” Schreiber Distrib. Co. v. Serv-Well Furniture Co., 806 F.2d 1393, 1401 (9th Cir. 1986); see Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1127 (9th Cir. 2000).

III. DISCUSSION

Plaintiff is an inmate currently serving a life sentence in federal prison. Mot. at 1. Since 2005, plaintiff has been incarcerated in three different prisons: Hazelton in West Virginia, Coleman I in Florida, and Victorville in California. Id. Plaintiff alleges that he has “severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss in his left ear and profound sensorineural hearing loss in his right ear.” Compl. ¶ 1. Plaintiff contends that even with the use of hearing aids, he “[g]enerally. . . is unable to hear any spoken words” and “under no circumstances . . . [can] hear or understand spoken conversation.” Id. Plaintiff alleges that he uses hearing aids to “better sense his surroundings by hearing noise or loud sounds” however the model he uses requires new batteries within a “few days to a few weeks.” Id. Plaintiff also alleges that his primary language is American Sign Language (ASL) and that he is “functionally illiterate.” Id. ¶¶ 1-2.

Plaintiff alleges that due to defendants’ failure to provide him with a qualified ASL

interpreter or “other reasonable auxiliary aids and services” plaintiff has been “unable to

communicate effectively with health care providers and mental health professionals, raise

medical issues, discuss mental health concerns, or understand the treatments and

medications they prescribe; excluded from participating in the same education, vocational

CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 3 of 7

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 32 Filed 07/11/11 Page 4 of 7 Page ID #:741
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Case No. Title

CV11-254 CAS (DTBx)

Date July 11, 2011

DAVID BRYANT v. UNITED STATES BUREAU OF PRISONS, ET AL.

and rehabilitation classes and work programs as hearing prisoners; deprived of knowledge or understanding of prison-wide safety and/or emergency announcements; deprived of knowledge or understanding of prison counts, meals and other important daily prison activities; unable to communicate effectively with correctional officers (“COs”) and other prison staff; subject to disciplinary action stemming from [d]efendants’ refusal to accommodate his deafness; unable to communicate effectively during such disciplinary action hearings; attacked by other inmates for attempting to activate close captioning on the television in his unit; and prevented from contacting family, friends and his attorneys.” Id. ¶¶ 3-4. Additionally, plaintiff contends that the prisons in which he has been incarcerated lack adequate equipment for him to be able to watch television or talk on the telephone and that the lack of a translator has deprived him of the ability to participate in prison activities or communicate effectively with prison guards. Id. ¶¶ 2-3.

Plaintiff seeks: “a qualified ASL interpreter . . . non-aural, non-written notification of emergencies or other important events and announcements, e.g., a vibrating pager; batteries for . . . hearing aid as needed; access to telecommunication devices appropriate for the deaf such as a videophone or TTY, equal to the telephone privileges of hearing inmates; and safe access to a television enabled with closed-captioning, commensurate with the television privileges afforded to other inmates. In the alternative. . .[plaintiff] requests a transfer to another prison, state or federal, with deaf inmates and programs for the deaf.” Id. at 4-5.

Defendants “deny that the BOP violated the Rehabilitation Act or [p]laintiff’s

Constitutional rights during his incarceration.” Mot. at 1. Additionally, defendants

allege that plaintiff has failed to exhaust all available administrative remedies as required

under the Prisoner Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA”), 42 U.S.C. § 1997e. Mot. at 2.

Defendants contend that in addition to “the internal prison grievance administrative

process, the Department of Justice (“DOJ”)(of which the BOP is a component) has

provided a separate process by which a federal inmate’s alleged violations of the

Rehabilitation Act will be investigated and resolved. 28 C.F.R. § 39.170.” Id.

Defendants contend that while plaintiff has exhausted the internal prison grievance

process, he has not complied with the process set forth in 28 C.F.R. § 39.170. Therefore,

defendants argue that plaintiff has not exhausted the DOJ process, and thus, this lawsuit

CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 4 of 7

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 32 Filed 07/11/11 Page 5 of 7 Page ID #:742
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Case No. Title

CV11-254 CAS (DTBx)

Date July 11, 2011

DAVID BRYANT v. UNITED STATES BUREAU OF PRISONS, ET AL.

is premature. Id. Additionally, defendants allege that plaintiff filed a complaint with the DOJ Equal Employment Opportunity (“EEO”) Office on May 2, 201,1 and that the EEO has 180 days to “‘complete the investigation of the complaint, attempt informal resolution, and, if no informal resolution is achieved, issue a letter of findings.’. . . [after which] complainant has 30 days to appeal.” Mot. at 3 (quoting 28 C.F.R. § 39.170(g)(1)).
Plaintiff contends that since he has exhausted the prison’s internal grievance process, he has satisfied the exhaustion requirement under the PLRA. Opp. at 2. Additionally, he alleges that defendants fail to “meet their burden of showing that the DOJ process under 28 C.F.R. § 39.170 is even available to Bryant.” Id. Plaintiff also alleges that he never filed a complaint with the DOJ EEO, but rather, counsel contacted “several government agencies to learn more about the process–including whether such a process even existed. No agency had any knowledge of it.” Id. Additionally, plaintiff argues that the additional grievance process alleged by defendants applies only to the Rehabilitation Act claim, and thus should the Court grant defendants motion, it should only apply to that claim and the Constitutional violations should be allowed to proceed.
There is no dispute that plaintiff has exhausted his BOP administrative remedies. See Mot. at 2; Opp. at 2. However, the issue before the Court is whether plaintiff must file an additional claim under 28 C.F.R. §39.170 in order to fulfill the exhaustion requirement set forth in the PLRA.1 “There is no question that exhaustion is mandatory under the PLRA and that unexhausted claims cannot be brought in court.” Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199 (2007). In order to exhaust a claim, “prisoners must complete the administrative review process in accordance with the applicable procedural rules [which are] defined not by the PLRA, but by the prison grievance process itself.” Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81, 88 (2006).

1 The applicable statute reads: “ No action shall be brought with respect to prison

conditions under section 1983 of this title, or any other Federal law, by a prisoner

confined in any jail, prison, or other correctional facility until such administrative

remedies as are available are exhausted.” 42 U.S.C § 1997e(a)(West).

CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 5 of 7

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 32 Filed 07/11/11 Page 6 of 7 Page ID #:743
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Case No. Title

CV11-254 CAS (DTBx)

Date July 11, 2011

DAVID BRYANT v. UNITED STATES BUREAU OF PRISONS, ET AL.

Since 28 C.F.R. §39.170 “applies to all allegations of discrimination on the basis of handicap in programs or activities conducted by the [DOJ],” the Court concludes that it applies to plaintiff’s Rehabilitation Act claim. The wording of 28 C.F.R. § 39.170 clearly contemplates that a federal prisoner would first exhaust BOP Administrative remedies, and then use this additional administrative remedy to redress his grievances under the Rehabilitation Act. See 28 C.F.R. § 39.170(d)(1)(ii) (“[b]efore filing a complaint under this section, an inmate in a federal penal institution must exhaust the Bureau of Prisons Administrative Remedy Procedures as set forth in 28 CFR part 542 [sic].”). However, 28 C.F.R. § 39.101 states that “[t]his part effectuates section 119 of the Rehabilitation, Comprehensive Services, and Developmental Disabilities Amendments of 1978, which amended section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 to prohibit discrimination on the basis of handicap in programs or activities conducted by Executive agencies. . .” As such, the Court believes that 28 C.F.R. § 39.170 is only applicable to plaintiff’s first claim for violation of the Rehabilitation Act. Therefore, the Court finds that plaintiff has not exhausted all the administrative remedies available to him for his Rehabilitation Act Claim, as required by the PLRA, and dismisses that claim without prejudice.2

2 The Court finds that the administrative remedy under 28 C.F.R. § 39.170 was not

unavailable to plaintiff. The PLRA requires exhaustion of “such administrative remedies

as are available” 42 U.S.C § 1997e(a). “An administrative remedy is not ‘available’ to an

inmate does not know about, and cannot discover through reasonable effort. . . remedies

or requirements for remedies . . . by the time they are needed.” Williams v. Marshall, 319

F. App’x 764, 768 (11th Cir. 2008). The 9th Circuit has excused an inmate from strict

adherence to the exhaustion requirement where prison officials have obstructed a

prisoner’s access to information or misled the prisoner to believe that the timing to file a

complaint is different than it actually is. See Ngo v. Woodford, 539 F.3d 1118, 1110 (9th

Cir. 2008). See also Nunez v. Duncan, 591 F.3d 1217, 1226 (9th Cir, 2010)(holding that

exhaustion was “excused” and administrative remedies were effectively unavailable

where prison provided prisoner with wrong information regarding administrative

process.). However, here, no facts suggest that Bryant was denied access to information,

or misled as to the requirements for filing a complaint. As plaintiff is represented by

counsel, it seems that Bryant had access to information about all administrative remedies

available. As such, the Court cannot excuse plaintiff from exhausting the administrative

CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 6 of 7

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 32 Filed 07/11/11 Page 7 of 7 Page ID #:744
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Case No. Title

CV11-254 CAS (DTBx)

Date July 11, 2011

DAVID BRYANT v. UNITED STATES BUREAU OF PRISONS, ET AL.

As 28 C.F.R. § 39.170 applies only to the Rehabilitation Act Claim, the Court denies defendants’ motion to dismiss the remainder of plaintiff’s claims. “[I]f a prisoner includes both exhausted and unexhausted claims, the court should dismiss only the unexhausted claim or claims.” Nunez v. Duncan, 591 F.3d 1217, 1224 (9th Cir. 2010)(citing Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199 (2007)). However, in the interest if judicial economy, the Court STAYS the five claims alleging violation of plaintiff’s constitutional rights until the BOP EEO has completed its process pursuant to 28 C.F.R. § 39.170. The parties are instructed to file a joint status report within 21 days of the BOP EEO’s determination of plaintiff’s Rehabilitation Act grievance as to its effect on the current dispute.

IV. CONCLUSION
Defendant’s motion to dismiss is GRANTED with respect to plaintiff’s first claim. The second, third, fourth, fifth and six claims are STAYED pending exhaustion of the first claim.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Initials of Preparer

00

:

13

CMJ

remedies available to him before filing in this Court as required by the PLRA.

CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 7 of 7

 
 Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 89 Filed 12/20/13 Page 1 of 25 Page ID #:1010

00/00//.C01a3se 21:21:11-9cv: 2-0702FA5X4-2C1A3S24-D99T9B90 DocumeNnAtT8IO9NWFIDilEedL1EG2A/2L0/13 Page 2 of 25 Page ID #:1011

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

2

3 N J\TURE OF T HE ACTION .............................................................................................. ) 4 JUR ISDICTION /\NO VENUE ..........................................................................................6 5 PAR1'IES ............................................................................................................................. 6

6

A . Pl aintiff ...................................... ....................................................................6

7

B. Defendants .....................................................................................................7

8 STJ\TEMENT OF FACTS .................... .. ............................................................................ 8

9 10

A. Auxi li ary Aids Available for Dea f Persons................................................... 8

I I

B. Defendants Failed to Provide Bryant with Necessary Auxili ary Aids and Accommodations.................................................................................. I0

12

c.

Bryant Seeks Relief Through the Prison Grievance Process and

13

Files S uit. ................... .................................................................................. 14

14

D. T he BOP Continues to Fail to Provide Bryant with Even the Most

15

Basic Auxi liary Aids and Accommodations Afte r His Transfer to USP T ucson................................................................................................. 16

16

E. Bryant Obtains a Series of Victories in the Administrative Process........... 17

17

18

F. Defendants Provide Bryant with Inconsistent Auxil iary Aids and Accommodations and Continue to Fail to Provide Other Ordered

19

Relie f................................................................ .. .............. ... . ...... ....... . ........ ..2 2

20 CLA IMS FOR RELI EF ......................................................................................... ............ 24

21 PRJ\ YER FOR R ELIEF..................................................................................................... 40

22

23

24
25

26

27

28

AMENDED AND SUPPLEMENTED COMPLAINT

• 00/00/2C01a3se 21:21:11-9c:v2-07 0F2A5X4-2C1A3S24-D99T9B90 DocumeNnAtT8IO9NWFIDilEedL1EG2A/2L0/13

•Page 3 of 25

Page ID #:1012

3

David Bryant, by hi s undersigned counse l, for his complaint against 2 defendants the Federal Bureau o f Prisons (the " BOP"); Char les Samuels, Jr. , in his 3 official capacity as Director of the BOP; and Juan Castillo, in his officia l capacity 4 as Regiona l Director of the Western Region of the BOP 1 (referred to collectively, 5 along with their predecessors and successors in equivalent positions, where 6 app licable, as "Defendants"), alleges as follows:

7

NATURE OF THE ACTION

X

I. This action concerns Defendants' repeated and continued fai lure to

9 provide Bryant-a deaf man in BOP custody si nce August 2005-with the

10 auxiliary aids and accommodations necessary to provide him with meaningful

It access to prison prog rams and activ ities on an equal basis with hearing individuals

12 and to ensure hi s health, safety and general welfare as required by the

13 Rehabilitation Act of 1973 ("Rehab ilitation Act"), 29 U.S.C. § 701 et seq., and the

14 First, Fifth and Eighth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

15

2. Bryant has been deaf since early ch ildhood.

16

3. As is common with other indiv iduals who became deaf early in life,

17 Engli sh , whether written or spoken, is not an effective method of communication

18 for Bryant. Bryant is not able to understand long sentences in written English and

19 cannot have complex communications in written English. The BOP itself has

20 measured Bryant's reading ability at just below a second-grade level. For spoken

21 English, Bryant cannot hear human speech even with the assistance of a hearing

22 aid, and Bryant understands only a very occasional simple word from lip reading.

23

4. Bryant' s primary and native language is American Sign Language

24 ("ASL"), and he prefers to communicate in ASL. ASL also is the only language in

25

This acti on was originally filed against Harley G. Lappin and Robert E.

26 McFadden in the ir official capacities. Mr. Samuels and Mr. Castillo have si nce

27 28

succeeded Mr. Lappin and substituted into this action Procedure 25(d).

Mr. as a

McFadden, respectively, and thus are automatically matter of law pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil

A~ENDED AND SUPPLEMENTED C0:0.1PLAINT

• 00/00//.C0a1s3e 21:21:11-c9v: 2-0702FA5X4-C21A3S2-4D99T9B90 DocumeNnAtT8IO9NvJFIDileEdL1E2G/A2L0/13

Page 4 of 25

Page ID #:1013

4

which Bryant can communi cate effectively. ASL is a complex language that

2 employs signs made with the hands, as well as facial ex pressions and other types of 3 body language, to co mmunicate thoughts o r concepts rather than words. ASL is 4 not simply English in hand s ignals; it is completely di stinct and different from

5 English and has its own vocabulary and grammatical and syntactical rules. On

6 account of these and other differences, there is no conventiona ll y accepted written

7 form of ASL.

8

s. Like other deaf people, Bryant must rely upon aux iliary aids and

9 accommodations in order to rece ive meaningful access to many of the programs

10 and serv ices of the federal government, including the BOP, equal to that of hearing

II individuals. These aux ili ary aids and accommodations are a lso necessary to

12 protect his constitutional rights.

13

6. During the time Bryant has been in the custod y of the BOP,

14 Defendants routinely have failed to provide Bryant with auxiliary aids and

15 accommodat ions, resulting in Bryant being:

16

•

unable to communicate effectively with health care providers and

17

mental health profess io nal s, raise medical issues with them, discuss

18

mental health concerns with them or understand the treatments and

19

medications they prescribe;

20

• excluded from participating in the same educational , vocational and

21

rehabi litative programs as hearing prisoners;

22

•

deprived of knowledge and/or understanding of prison-wide

23

emergency and/or other important announcements;

24

•

attacked by other inmates fo r attempting to activate closed-captioning

25

on prison televisions; and

26

•

prevented from contacting and effective ly communicating with his

27

family, friends and attorneys using an effective telecommunications

28

device.

-2-

1\M ENDED AND SUPPLEMENTED COMPLAINT

00/00/2C01a3se 21:21:11-9cv: 2-0702FA5X4-C21A3S24-D99T9B90 DocumeNnAtT8IO9NWFIDilEedL1EG2A/2L0/13 Page 5 of 25 Page ID #:1014

5

1

7. Bryant first exhausted the BOP's internal administrative remedy

2 process and was denied any re lief. Bryant then fil ed his first Co mp laint in this

3 acti on on January 7, 2011, alleging claims under the Rehabilitation Act and the

4 First, Fifth and Eighth Amendments to the U.S. Co nstitution against the BOP;

5 then-Directo r of the BOP, Harley G . Lappin; then-Reg ional Directo r of the BOP,

6 Robert E. McFadden; and the n-Warden of United States Penitentiary ('' USP")

7 Victorville, Francisco Quintana , in the ir o ffic ial capacities. After filing the

8 Co mplaint, Bryant was transferred from USP Vi ctorville to USP Canaan in

9 Pennsylvan ia and then, in Jul y 20 11, was transferred again to USP Tucson in

10 Ari zona.

ll

8. On May 3 1, 2011 , De fendants moved to dismiss the Complaint o n the

12 gro und that Bryant had not exhausted the Department of Justice's administrative

13 process in 28 C.P.R.§ 39. 170 (the " Administrati ve Process"). On July II , 2011 ,

14 th e Court granted Defendants' motion in part and denied it in part, dismiss ing

15 Bryant's claim under the Re habilitation Act witho ut prejudice and staying his

16 claims under the First, Fifth and E ighth Amendments to the U.S . Constitution,

17 pending exhaustion of the Administrative Process.

18

9. On September 4, 201 3, Bryant exhausted the Administrati ve Process

19 whe n Co mplaint Adjudication Officer Mark Gross issued the Final Decision of th e

20 Department of Justice regarding Bryant's administrative complaint (the

21 "Administrative Decision").

22

10 . Bryant prevailed. Following a live hearing where e le ven witnesses

23 testified, including four expert witnesses, the Administrat ive Decision found, as

24 alleged in the first Complaint, that Bryant is an indi vidual with a disability and th at

25 the BOP had violated the Rehabilitation Act by, inter alia , failing to provide him

26 with the au xi liary aids necessary to ensure effecti ve communication. The

27 Admin istrative Decision found that at USP Tucson the BOP had failed to provide

28 Bryant with (1) qualified ASL interpreters; (2) an adequate notification system to

-3-

A MENDED AN D SUPPLEMENTED COM PLA INT

00/00/2C0a13se 21:211: 1-c9v: -20702FA5X4-C21A3S24-D99T9B90 DocumeNnAtT8lO9NWFIDileEdL1E2G//2\L0/13 Page 6 of 25 Page ID #:1015

6

make him aware of emergencies; and (3) sufficient access to a te lecommunicatio ns

2 dev ice fo r the deaf ("TDD") as required by the Rehabilitation Act. The

3 Administrative Decision requires the BOP to pro vide Bryant with (a) a qualified

4 ASL interpreter whenever he participates in "prog rams or services"; (b) a

5 notificatio n sys tem suffi c ient to prov ide him with "adequate no tice .. . of

6 emergencies"; (c) access to a TDD o n terms "comparable to that of o ther inmates";

7 (d) a hearing aid (which helps Bryant better sense his surroundings) and hearing

8 aid batteries as needed; and (e) access to closed-captioned television.

9

ll . The Administrati ve Decisio n represents a significa nt victory for

lO Bryant. The BOP has agreed that it must pro vide the re lief ordered there in.

ll

12. However, the Administrative Decision does not provide a ll of the

12 relie f that Bryant sought, relie f to which Bryant is entitled under the Constitution

13 and the Rehabilitatio n Act.

14

13. Bryant seeks further re lie f in at leas t three respects. First, the

15 Administrative Decision determined that the BOP may satisfy its obligatio ns under

16 the Rehabi litatio n Act fo r its telecommunications program by providing a

17 teletypewriter ("TTY")2 to Bryant. Bryant, however, cannot communicate

J 8 effectively in written English as required to use a TTY. lnstead, he can onl y

19 communicate e ffective ly in ASL, which a videophone, his preferred auxiliary aid ,

20 makes poss ible for telecommuni cations.3 Second, the Administrati ve Decision

2 1 determined that a fl ashing blue light in Bryant's housing unit, flashing amber lights

22 on the guard tower in the recreation yard, and an inmate companion could provide

23

24 2

Throug h use o f a s mall text dis play, a keyboard and a receiver for a

25 telephone handset, TTYs all ow users to transmit typewritten messages thro ugh a

te le ph o ne.

26

3
27

Videophones come in a variety o f forms, including standalone uni ts with a

display, input device and camera. Videophones allo w users to communicate via

28 ASL by simultaneo usly transmitting video between users .

-4-

AM eNDED AND SUPPLEM ENTED COMPLAINT

00/00/2C01a3se 21:21:11-9cv: 2-0702F~5.X4-C21A3S24-D99T9B90 DocumeNnAtT 8fO9NWFI DileE dL1E2G//2\L0/13 Page 7 of 25 Page ID #:1016

7

Bryant with "adequate notice," but did not actuall y determine whether such aids do

2 so. Such aids are not adequate as they do no t provide notice equivalent to that

3 provided to hearing individuals. For this reason , Bryant prefers a vibrating pager

4 o r visual paging system as a non-aural notificatio n system. Third, the

5 Administrative Decisio n did not order the BOP to pay atto rneys' fees, but instead

6 directed Bryant, as the ''prevailing party," to seek his attorneys' fees in this Court.

7 Bryant thus seeks to recover those fees in this action.

8

14. Moreover, the BOP has fa iled, and continues to fai l, to prov ide all the

9 relief ordered in the Administrative Decision and required by the Rehabilitation

10 Act and U.S. Constitution- including relief which the BOP has agreed to provide 11 to Bryant.

12

15. Since the Administrative Decision, Defendants have failed to provide

13 Bryant with qualified ASL interpreters at all times requi red. For example, despite

14 hav ing had years since his transfer in July 20 II to contract for qu ali fi ed AS L

15 interpreters, the BOP has not do ne so fo r Bryant's educational co urses, resulting in

16 those courses, including aGED course, being delayed.

17

16. Additionally, Defendants have failed to ensure that Bryant has a

18 properly functioning hearing aid. Recently, when Bryant informed BOP staff that

19 his hearing aid was not functioning properly, the BOP staff to ld him that they did

20 not believe him and that his hearing aid would not be repaired or replaced.

21

17. The BOP also has failed to provide Bryant with access to the TTY in

22 the evenings and on the weekends-when his family and friends are most likely to 23 be ava ilable~ven though hearing inmates may use standard telephones at these

24 times.

25

18 . These repeated fa ilures coupled with the Defendants' hi storic failures

26 to provide any auxiliary aids and accommodations evidence a strong likelihood

27 that Defendants will continue to fail to comply with the Rehabilitation Act and

28 U.S. Constitution absent a Court order requiring them to do so.

-5-

AMENDED AND SUPP!.EMENTP.D COMPLAINT

00/00/2C01a3se 21:21:11-9c:v2-700F2A5X4-2C1A3S24-D99T9B90 DocumeNnAtTI8O9NWFIDilEedLE1G2A/2L0/13

•Page 8 of 25

Page ID #:1017

8

19. Moreover, the facts that Defendants have previously transferred 2 Bryant between institutions instead of providing him with required auxiliary aids 3 and stated that Bryant likely will be transferred again demonstrate that a j udici al 4 order is required to ensure Defendants' compliance with their statutory and 5 Constitutional obligations.

6

20. Bryant thus brings this action both to (i) confmn the re lief ordered in

7 the Admin istrati ve Decision and end the BOP's haphazard, ineffectual

8 implementation of thi s required relief, and (ii ) obtain further relief not ordered in

9 the Administrative Decis ion, but compelled by the facts and the law. This further

10 reli ef specificall y includes Bryant 's access to a videophone and an adequate

11 notifi cati on system at whatever institution he is housed. Finall y, Bryant seeks to

12 recover the substantial attorneys' fees incurred by his counsel in this action and the

13 Administrat ive Process.

14

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

15

2 1. This Court has subject matter jurisdi ction over this acti on pursuant to

16 28 U.S.C. § 133 1 because this at.:tion arises under the Constitution and laws of the

17 United States.

18

22. Venue was proper in this Judicial District when the fi rst Complaint

19 was filed, and Defendants did not challenge venue in res ponding to the first

20 Complaint. Moreover, venue remains proper in this Judicial District pursuant to 28

21 U.S.C. § 139 1(e) bet.:ausc, as demonstrated throughout this Amended and

22 Supplemented Complaint, a substantial part of the events and omissions giving ri se 23 to Bryant's claims occurred in this District, comprising a serious, continuous and 24 ongo ing vio lation of Bryant's federa l statutory and Constitutional rights.

25

PARTIES

26

A. Plaintiff

27

23 . Bryant is a 49-year o ld deaf man who is serving a life sentence in the

28 custody of Defendants. Since August 2005, Bryant has been housed in at least six

-6-

A M ENDED AND SUPPLEMENTED COMPLAINT

00/00/2C0a1s3e 21:211: 1-c9v: -20702FA5X4-C21A3S2-4D99T9B90 DocumeNnAtT8IO9NWFIDileEdL1E2G/A2L0/13 Page 9 of 25 Page ID #:1018

9

separate BOP pri son fac ili ties located throughout the country: USP Hazelto n in

2 Bruceton Mills, West Virg inia fro m August 2005 to October 2009~ USP Coleman I

3 in Coleman, Florida from Octo ber 2009 to March 2010; USP Victorville in

4 Adelanto, California from March 20 10 to March 2011 ; Metro po litan Detention

5 Ce nter ("MDC" ) Broo klyn in Broo klyn, New Yo rk from Apri l 2011 to May 201 1;

6 USP Canaan in Waymart, Pennsylvan ia fro m M ay 201 1 to Jul y 2011 ; and USP

7 Tucson in Tucso n, -Ari zona from 1uly 14, 20 l l throug h the present.

8

B. Defendants

9

24. T he BOP is the federal executive agency res ponsible fo r th e

10 supervision and custody of over 2 17,000 inmates, inc luding Bryant. T he BOP is

11 headquarte red in Washingto n, D.C.

12

25. C harles Samuels, Jr. is the current Directo r of the BOP . As Director

13 o f the BOP, he is respo nsible fo r the oversight and management of the BOP's more

14 than 1J7 institutions and for the safety and security of the more th an 2 17,000

15 inmates under the agency's jurisdiction. He is also responsible for develo ping and 16 directing the implementati on of the BOP's po licies and practices regarding the 17 treatment of and services provided to disab led inmates. Upon information and

18 be lief, he is aware of the BOP's po lic ies and practices regarding disabled

19 individuals and , due to hi s pos itio n at the BOP, has constructive and/or actual 20 knowledge of Defendants' fa ilure to accommodate Bryant's deafne ss in its 21 programs and services. He is sued in his offic ial capac ity.

22

26 . Juan Castillo is the current Regional Directo r of the BOP's Western

23 Regio n. He is responsible for the develo pment, approval , imple me ntation,

24 mo nitoring and evaluation of polic ies, operations and programs for the 12 federal 25 institutions and three complexes in the Western Region, including USP Victorville 26 and USP Tucson. Upon information and be lief, he is aware of the BOP's po licies 27 and practices regarding disabled individuals and, due to his pos ition at the BOP, 28

-7-
Al'vtEI'\DED AND SUPPLEM ENTED COMPLAINT

00/00/2C0a1s3e 2:1121:-1c9v:-20702F5A4X-C/.A13S2-4D9T9B990DocumeNnAt T8I9ONWFIiDleEd L1E2G/2AL0/13 Page 10 of 25 Page ID #:1019 10

has constructive and/or actual knowledge of Defendants' fai lure to accom modate

2 Bryant's deafness in its programs and services. He is sued in hi s offic ial capaci ty.

3

STATEMENTOFFACTS

4

A. Auxiliary Aids Availablc for Deaf Persons.

5

27. Deaf persons must rely upon auxiliary aids and accommodations in

6 o rder to receive meani ngfu l access to many of the programs and services of the

7 federal governmen t and on a basis equal to that of hearing individua ls. Examples

8 of such aids inc lude qualified AS L interpreters, c losed-captio ning o n telev is io ns,

9 hearing aids, visua l paging systems, vibrating pagers and v ideopho nes.

I 0

28. A qualified ASL interpreter is one who is "able to interpret

I I e ffect ively, accurately and impartially both recepti vely and express ively, usi ng any

12 necessary specialized vocabulary." 28 C.F.R . § 35. 104. In the prison contex t, the

13 requ irement of impartial ity forecloses prison staff or other inmates from be ing

14 quali fied ASL interpreters. Although fluency in ASL is a necessary condition to

15 being a qualified AS L interpreter , it is not a s ufficient o ne s ince the cognitive

16 processes involved in interpreti ng are complex and requ ire speci fie training. In

17 response to concerns over the qua lification of interpreters and to provide an

18 independent and objective measure of qualifications, standards have been

19 deve loped by professio nal organizations, such as the Registry o f Interpreters for

20 the Deaf and the Natio nal Association of the D eaf, and licensing requirements have

21 been imposed by various states, including Cali fo rni a and Arizona. These certified

22 interpreters also are bound by a code of conduct, which includes confidentiality.

23

29. C losed-captioning di splays a transcription of the aud io portion of the

24 broadcast on a television, including spoken di alogue and other non-spoken aural

25 elements. All telev isions 13 inches or larger sold in the United States must be

26 equipped with closed-caption ing.

27

30. Both visual pag ing systems and vibrating pagers are methods of

28 providing the deaf with no n-aural notificatio ns of emergencies and other

-8-

AVIENDED AND SUPPLF.ME:-ITED COMPLAINT

00/00/2C0a1s3e 2:1121: -1c9v:-20702F5A4X-C2A13S2-4D9T9B990DocumeNnAt T8IO9NWFIDileE:d L1E2G/2AL0/13 Page 11 of 25 Page ID #:1020 11

announcements. A visual paging system is a wall-mounted screen that can display 2 visua l messages e ither in pictu res or a few simple words what is being broadcast 3 over a pub lic address ("PA ") system. It is the function al equivalent of an

4 electronic marquee. A vibrating pager is a pager that can display visual messages 5 either in pictures or a few simple words what is being broadcast over a PA system 6 and that vibrates upon receipt of that message.

7

3 1. Both TTYs and videophones are TDDs that, unlike a standard

8 telephone, do not re ly on a user's ability to hear or speak.

9

32. TTYs allow communication directly with other TTY users by

I0 exchanging written text messages over the telephone lines. They also allow

J I communication indirectly with non-TTY users through a relay service in which the

12 relay operato r receives the typewritten message from the TTY, reads it over the

l 3 phone to the non-TTY user and then transcribes the spoken response for the TTY

14 user. A TTY relies on the deaf user's ability to communicate in writing. Because

15 of the limitations on a user's typing speed and a variety of other technological

16 limitations, it is a much more time-intensive communication tool than a standard

17 telephone. While TTYs were once the standard for deaf telecommunication,

18 technologica l advances are such that the vast majority of deaf individuals no longer

19 have TTYs and teleco mmunicate sole ly by videophone.

20

33. Videophones allow for visual , real-time commu nicatio n by means of a

21 video feed through an internet connection. A videophone allows deaf persons to

22 communicate using ASL ei ther with another ASL-videophone user or with hearing

23 telephone users through a Video Relay Service ("VRS"). YRS operators are

24 qua li fied ASL interpreters who trans late ASL into spoken English and back again

25 in realtime. The deaf person signs to the VRS operator over the videophone and

26 the operator then speaks what is being signed in ASL to the hearing person over

27 the telephone. Then, the operator signs in ASL to the deaf videophone user the

28 spoken response from the hearing person. Videophones also can be employed to

-9-

AMENDED AND SUPPLEMENTED COMPLAINT

00/00/2C0a1s3e 21:121: 1-c9v:-20702F5AX4-C21A3S2-4D9T99B90DocumeNnAtT8IO9NWFIDilEe:dL1E2:G/A2L0/13 Page 12 of 25 Page ID #:1021 12

prov ide Video Remote Interpreting ("VRI") services, which utilize videophone

2 technology to provide off-site qualified ASL interpreters. The on ly difference

3 between VRJ and VRS is that with VRI, the hearing person and deaf person are in

4 the same room, while for VRS, the deaf person signs over the videophone and th e

5 operator then speaks by telephone to a hearing person in a remote location.

6

34. Videophones have many advantages over TTYs. Communi cations via

7 videophones, even us ing VRS, are much faster than via TTYs. Most impo rtantly,

8 however, videophones enable native-AS L speakers to co mmuni cate in their native

9 language rather than forcing them to read and write in another language in wh ich

10 they mi ght not be ab le to communicate effectively. Thu s, for Bryant, who

11 co mmuni cates e ffectively in ASL but not in written English, a videophone is the

12 only TDD that permits effective co mmunication.

13

35. Videophones arc cheap to install, operate and maintain. In general,

14 videopho ne equipment is provided free of charge by VRS pro viders. Likewise,

15 VRS is provided free of charge thro ug h a federal government program. Aside

16 from costs associated with a conventio nal internet connection, there are no

17 additiona l costs to operate videophones or access VRS.

18

36. Correctional facilities throughout the country, including in Virginia,

19 Texas, Minnesota, Wi sconsi n and California, have install ed or are in the process of

20 installing videophones for inmates. Furthermore, videophone conversations,

2 1 including conversations over VRS , can be reco rded and mo nitored by correctional

22 facilities. Videophone providers have expressed a willing ness and desire to work

23 alongside the BOP to install videopho ne technology compatible with the BOP's

24 existing in frastn1ctu re and security concerns.

25 26

B.

Defendants Failed to Provide Aids and Accommodations.

Bryant

with

Necessary

Auxiliary

27

37. Beginning in August 2005, at each of the fi ve separate BOP

28 institution s at which Bryant was housed, Defendants failed time and again to

-10-

AMENDED A.'liD SUPPLEMENTED COMPLAINT

00/00/2C0a1s3e 21:121: -1c9v:-?0702F5A4X-C2A13S2-4D9T99B90DocumeNnAt T8I9ONWFIiDleEd L1E2G/A2L0/13 Page 13 of 25 Page ID #:1022 l3

provide Bryant with auxiliary aids and accommodations required by the

2 Rehabilitatio n Act and U.S . Constitution. Defendan ts' persis tent failure to

3 accommodate his di sability resulted in Bryant being ex cluded from or denied

4 meaningful access to the BOP' s medical, educational, and vocatio nal programs as

5 wel l as other programs and services, including telecommun ications and television.

6 Defendants' failure to accommo date Bryant 's disabil ity also posed serious dangers

7 to Bryant' s health and safety and resulted in him being unfairl y disciplined by

8 Defendants. The failu res at these five BOP institutions are described be lo w.

9

38. Qualified ASL Interpreters. Defendan ts were aware that Bryant

10 requires the ass istance of a qualified ASL interpreter in order to communicate

11 effectively with the BOP and its staff except fo r the most sta ndard , contex t-driven

12 and basic communications. Defendants, however, cons istently denied Bryant the

13 ass istance of such interpreters to access BOP programs and serv ices, including

14 medical, psychiatric, educatio nal , vocational and disciplinary prog rams and

15 services.

16

39. The consequences resulting from Defendants' fa ilure to provide

17 Bryant with qua lified ASL interpreters were severe. Bryant had several

18 misunderstand ings with prison staff and officials and perceived disciplinary issues,

19 so metimes s imply for not res ponding to ora l orders, wh ich res ulted in Bryant being

20 placed for long periods of time in the special housing unit ("S HU") where inmates

2 1 are "secure ly separated from the general inmate population." 28 C. F.R. § 541.21.

22 Further, Bryant was unable to access the BOP's medical and psychiatric programs

23 and services o n equal terms with hearing inmates. On account of D efendants'

24 fai lure to provide qualified ASL interpreters, Bryant was unab le to co mmunicate

25 effectively with med ical or psychi atric providers, resulting in Bryant being

26 misdiagnosed , treated improperl y and treated witho ut his informed consent. For

27 example:

28

-I 1-

AMENDED AND SUPPLEMENTED COMPLAINT

00/00/2C0a1s3e 21:121: -1c9v:-20702F5A4X-C2A13S2-4D9T9B990DocumeNnAt T8I9ONWFIiDleEd L1E2G/A2L0/13 Page 14 of 25 Page ID #:1023 14

•

Upon admission to US P Hazelton in August 2005, Bryant was

2

evaluated by med ical and psycho log ica l staff w ithout the assistance of

3

an AS L interpreter. As a result, he was placed o n a heavy regime n o f

4

psychotropic drugs, inc luding Haldo l, Trazodone, Prolix in, Prozac

s

and Cogentin . Without the aid of a qua lified ASL interpreter, Bryant

6

had no way of knowing what drugs he was taking or understanding

7

their side effects. A different medica l staff me mber later no ted that

8

Bryant " may have bee n given medication for what appeared to be

9

ag itation , like ly re lated to diffic ulty co mmunicating." When Bryant

10

was reev aluated with the aid o f a qualified AS L interpreter, this staff

11

membe r decided th at the med ications were unnecessary a nd adjusted

12

his drug regime n with th e goal o f weaning him off the medications

13

entire ly.

14

•

Wh ile at USP Vi ctorvi ll e, Bryant was pl aced in the SHU for several

15

months without being info rmed of the reason for his separatio n from

16

the gene ral populati on. Bryant's counsel la te r discovered tha t

17

Bryant's confineme nt to th e SHU occurred because the BOP was

18

under the mistaken impression that Bryant h ad requested to be there,

19

clearly a mi scommun icati on. Altho ugh Bryant a nd his counsel

20

attempted to correct this mi sunderstanding , th e BOP did not release

21

Bryant from the S HU until sho rtly before he was transferred from

22

USP Victorville.

23

•

While at USP Victorv ille, Bryant was deprived of func tion ing hearin g

24

aids for several mo nths whi le the BOP purportedly attempted to

25

provide him with rep laceme nts. On October 7, 20 I0--months after

26

Bryant had turned in his hearing ai ds to medica l staff- Bryant was

27

finall y supposed to meet with an aud iologist to be evaluated for new

28

hearing aids. However, the correctiona l officer refused to let Bryant

- 12-

AMENDED A.'.JO SUPPLE:-.!cNTED COMPL.I\INT

• 00/00/2C0a1s3e 21:121:-1c9v:-20702F5A4X-C2A1JS2-~D9T99B90DocumeNnAt T8T9ONWFliDleE:d L1E2G/2AL0/13

•Page 15 of 25

Page ID #:1024

lS

1

leave hi s cell without explan ation . Bryant th erefo re missed the

2

appointment. When the appointme nt was fina lly rescheduled in

3

January 201 I, it was conducted without a qualified ASL interpreter.

4

As a result, when Bryant had concerns about the metho do logy o f the

5

test, Bryant was unable to raise those concerns with the audiologist

6

and ultimate ly received a hearing aid that was not suffic ientl y

7

po werful.

8

40. Non-Aural Notifications. Defendants failed to provid e Bryant with

9 non-aural notifi cati on of emergencies and othe r important prison announcements.

I 0 As a result. Bryant was no t info rmed of emergencies, such as prison lockdowns,

I I and impo rtant pri son anno uncements, such as scheduled movements, mea ls and

12 acti vities- informatio n that hearing inmates received. The lac k of an y no n-aural

13 notifi cation s ystem al so resulted in Bryant be ing unfairly di sciplined by BOP staff.

14 For ex ample, while at USP Hazelton in June 2007, BOP staff informed inmates

15 aurall y that it was time fo r the inmates to line up to go to the cafeteria. Bryant did

16 not hear thi s call to line up and s h01tl y thereafter asked one of the g uards to be

17 taken to the cafeteria. The guard attempted to inform Bryant that Bryant had

18 mi ssed the call and wo uld have to skip the meal. Bryant attempted to ex plain the

19 issue to the guard , but due to communication barriers, the guard perceived Bryant 's

20 attempt to communi cate as a threat and sent Bryant to the SHU as punishment.

21

4 1. Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf. De fendants failed to

22 prov ide Bryant with a videopho ne as required to ensure effecti ve communication.

23 Instead , Bryant was required to try to telecommunicate throug h typed written

24 messages in English via a TTY. This continuing failure has e ffectively excluded

25 him from the BOP's te lephone servi ces and prevented him from meaningful

26 communi cation with his family and attorneys due to his inability to communicate

27 e ffectively in English. Further, Defendants did no t g rant Bryant meaningful access

28 even to the TTY. De fendants often failed to maintain and prov ide Bryant with a

- 13-

A M ENDED AND SUPPLEMENTED COMPLAINT

00/00/2C0a1s3e 21:121: -1c9v:-20702fA5X4-C2A13S2-4D9T9B990DocumeNnAt T8I9ONWFIiDleEd L1E2G/A2L0/13 Page 16 of 25 Page ID #:1025 16

functioning TTY, improperly charged Bryant for calls made us ing the TTY, and

2 otherwise restricted Bryant's access to the TTY in a way hearing inmates were not

3 restricted, for instance, by limiting the days and hours that he was allowed to use it.

4

42. Hearing Aids. De fendants failed to prov ide Bryant with functi o ning

5 hearing aids and replacement hearing aid batte ri es o n an as-needed basis, rendering

6 his hearing aids non-fun ctioning for long periods of time. At times, Defe ndants

7 even forced Bryant to remove his hearing aids because th ey were damaged and

8 e mitting feedback. Bryant also was not g iven ne w hearing aids whe n hi s hearing

9 a ids were broken. Althoug h hearing aids do no t enable Bryant to hear speech, they

I 0 enab le him to sense certain loud noises and better respond to hi s surroundings. By

II denyi ng Bryant the use of working hearing aids, Defendants were de liberate ly

12 indifferent to and placed Bryant at a serio us ri sk of phys ical harm.

13

43. Closed- Captioned Television. Defendants failed to pro vide closed-

14 captioning-enabled te levi s ions to Bryant and ensure that Bryant woul d not face

15 vio lent retribution fro m other inmates for enabling the c losed-captioning fun ction

16 o n the televis ions. Through these failures, Defendants effectively excluded him

17 from a program available to hearing inmates. For exampl e, by Defendants not

18 taking reasonab le effOits to ensure that Bryant did not face reprisals for enabl ing

19 closed-captio ning, Bryant has been attacked on multipl e occasions by other

20 inmates for trying to activate the closed-captioning o n his unit' s tel evisio n. After

2 1 o ne such attack at USP Co leman I, rather than address ing the problem, De fendants

22 allo wed Bryant to be sent to the SH U for five month s at which point he was

23 transferred to another BOP facility.

24 25

c.

Bryant Seeks Relief ana Files Suit.

Through

the

Prison

Grievance

Process

26

44. T o redress these (and other) pro ble ms, Bryant beg an requesting

27 auxil iary aids and accommodations fo r his deafness in 2007 through the prison's

28 internal administrative remed y process. ln a series o f requests filed between 2007

- 14-

1\M EN OED AND SUPPLEMENTED COM PLAINT

00/00/2C0a1s3e 21:121: -1c9v:-20702F5A4X-C21A3S2-4D9T9B990DocumeNnAt T8I9ONvFlliDleEd I1,E2G/A2L0/13 Page 17 of 25 Page ID #:1026 17

and 20 11 , Bryant soug ht: (i) qualified ASL interpreters fo r all BOP programs and 2 services; (ii) non-aural no tification of emergencies and other important 3 anno uncements throug h a vibrat ing pager or visua l paging system; ( iii ) meaningfu l 4 access to a videophone o r, at the very least, a func ti o ning TTY; (iv) hearing aids 5 and hearing aid batteries as needed; and (v) safe access to closed-captioned 6 te levisio n.

7

45. Rather than provide the auxiliary aids and accommodations Bryant

8 sought, Defendants punished Bryant for pn11icipating in the priso n's internal

9 admi nistrative remedy process and fo r asserting hi s rights under the U.S.

10 Constitution and the Rehabilitation Act. Defendan ts repeatedly transferred Bryant

II from prison to prison, upo n informatio n and belief, in an attempt to moot his

12 adm inistrative remedy requests. For example, after Bryant completed the

I3 administrative process at US P Hazelto n, the then-Regional Directo r of the Mid-

I4 Atlantic Region of the BOP, Kim M. White, informed Bryant, in a letter dated

15 October 8, 2009, that he had been transferred and asserted that this transfer

16 "render[edJ moot any specific issues rBryant] had related to his incarceration at

17 USP Hazelton." Similarl y, as Bryant neared completion of the prison

18 administrative remed y process at US P Cole man 1, Defendants transferred Bryant

19 from that fac ility to USP Victorville. In addition to transferring Bryant to other

20 institutions to avoid resolving his claims, Defendants also punished him by

21 keeping him in the SHU. ln July 2010, Defendants sent Bryant to th e SHU at USP

22 Victorville in an apparent response to his requests for aux iliary aids and

23 accommodations and in li eu of prov iding him with those aux iliary aids and

24 accommodations.

25

46. Bryant exhausted the prison's internal administrative remedy process

26 and comme nced this lawsuit on January 7, 20 11. The first Complaint brought

27 claims under the Rehabilitation Act and the First, Fifth and Eighth Amendments to

28 the U.S. Constitution against Defendants, seeking: ( i) qualified ASL interpreters

-15-

AMENDED AND SUPPLEMENTED COMPLAINT

00/00/2C0a1s3e 2:1121:-1c9v:-20702F5A4X-C2A11S2-~D9T9B990DocumeNnAt T8I9ONWFIilDel:d: L1E2G/2A0L /13 Page 18 of 25 Page ID #:1027 18

for all programs and serv ices of the BOP; (ii) non-aural notification of emergencies 2 and other announcements through a vibrating pager or visual paging system;

3 (i ii ) meaningful access to a videophone; (iv) hearing aids and hearing aid batteries

4 as needed; and (v) safe access to closed-captioned television.

5

47. Defendants moved to di s miss the Complaint on the ground that Bryant

6 had failed to properly ex haust the c laims under the Prison Litigation Refonn Act

7 ("PLRA"), 42 U.S.C. § 1997e. Defendants conceded that Bryant had exhausted

8 the prison's intemaJ admin istrative gri evance process (e.g., Dkt. No. 24 at 10), but

9 contended that Bryant had failed to exhaust all available admin istrative remedies

10 because he had not completed the Admi nistrative Process.

11

48. On July 11, 2011 , this Court dismissed Bryant's Rehabilitation Act

J2 c laims without prejudice and stayed his constitutional claims, pending completion

J3 of th e Administrative Process.

14 15

D.

The BOP Continues Basic Auxiliary Aids USP Tucson.

taonFdaiAJ ctocoPmromvoiddaetBiornysaAntftweritHh iEsvTernanthsefeMr toost

16

49. Following periods of incarceration at MDC BrookJyn and USP

17 Canaan, Bryant was ultimately transferred to USP Tucson in Arizona in July 2011.

18 Defendants continued to fai l to provide any auxiliary a ids and accommodations to

19 him desp ite their awareness of Bryant' s needs and requests. Defendants d id not

20 provide Bryant with a qualified ASL interpreter during his initial intake screening

2 1 at which Bryant' s physical health was evaluated and housing placement was

22 determined. Nor did Defendants provide Bryant with a qualified ASL interpreter

23 during hi s interactions with medical staff at USP Tucson, except for a single

24 appointment with an audio logist in December 2011. Moreover, Defendants did not

25 provide Bryant with access to a videophone, and the access they provided to a TTY

26 was not equivalent to the access to telephones they provided to hearing inmates.

27

28

-16-

AMENDED AND St:PPLEMENTED COMPLAI:"<T

00/00/2C0a1s3e 21:121: -1c9v:-)0702F5AX4-C~1A3S2-4D9T99B90 DocumeNnAtT8IO9NvFJIiDleEd L1E2G/A2L0/13 Page 19 of 25 Page ID #:1028 19

2

E.

Bryant Obtains Process.

a

Series

of

Victories

in

the

Administrative

3

50. On May 9, 20 II , Richard Toscano, Directo r o f the Equa l Employ ment

4 Opportunity ("EEO") Staff of the DOl' s Justice Management Di vision, determined

5 that Bryant had filed a co mplaint under 28 C.F.R. § 39. 170 that was complete as of

6 May 2, 20 II , thereby commencing the Administrative Process. D irector Toscano

7 requested that Mina Raskin, an EEO Officer of the BOP, attempt to informally

8 resolve Bryant's compl aint and, if not informall y reso lved, inves tigate th e

9 complaint and issue a Letter of Find ings.

10

5 1. On November 2, 20 11 , EEO O fficer Raskin issued a Letter of

II Find ings (attached hereto as Exhibit A). ft found that the Rehabil itation Act

12 required the BOP to provide Bryant wi th (i) qualified ASL interpreters when he

13 "attends an educational program, meets with a hea lthcarc provider or participates

14 in a discipli nary proceeding"~ (ii) "an inmate companion coupl ed with the use o f

15 some sott of visual alarm" to provide notificati on of emergencies and other

16 announcements; (iii) restricted access to a TTY; (iv) heari ng aids and hearing aid

17 batteries as needed ; and (v) closed-captioning when "Bryant is watching

18 television."

19

52. The Letter of Findings represented a significant victory for Bryant.

20 The BOP's own EEO Officer admitted the need to provide Bryant with auxiliary

21 aids and accommodations for his deafness and found that the BOP was failing to

22 do so. The Letter of Findings, however, lacked clarity on certain of its proposed

23 remedies and failed to provide certain o ther rel ief required by the Rehabilitation

24 Act. Therefore, on December 2, 20 11 , Bryant appealed the Letter of Findings and

25 requested a hearing before an administrative law j udge. The BOP indicated that it

26 agreed with the Letter of Findi ngs and falsely contended that it was in compliance

27 with it and providing the auxiliary aids and accommodations o rdered therein.

28

-17-

AMeNDED AND SUPPLEMENTED COMPLAINT

00/00/2C0a1s3e 2:1121: -1c9v:-20702F5A4X-C2A13S2-4D9T9B990DocumeNnAt T8I9ONWFIiDleEd L1E2G/2AL0/13 Page 20 of 25 Page ID #:1029 20

53. Between July 3 1, 20 12 and August 3, 20 12, an admini strative heari ng

2 was held befo re Administrative Law Judge Ellen K. Tho mas. The adm inistrative

3 hearing was limited in scope to Bryant' s confinement at USP Tucson. No pre-

4 hearing d iscovery was a ll owed. The first opportunity that Bryant's counsel had to

S speak with the BOP's many witnesses was at the hearing itself. The hearing

6 comprised e leven witnesses over four days, and was held inside USP Tucson.

7

54. On June 20,20 13, Judge Thomas issued the Recommended Decision

8 With Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Remedies ("Recommended

9 Decisio n") (attached hereto as Exhibit B). The Recommended Decision went

10 beyond the Letter of Findings' recommendations and conclusions. Judge Tho mas

11 found that the BOP had violated the Rehab ilitation Act at USP Tucson over and

12 over again by (a) failing to provide Bryant with a qualified ASL interpreter for

13 prison programs, including medical care and educational programs; (b) failing to

14 keep Bryant adequately notifi ed of emerge ncies; and (c) failing to provide Bryant

15 with meaningful access to a TDD. Judge Thomas pro posed the fo llowi ng

16 remedies, whi ch constitute a subs tantial portion of th e relief Bryant has sought

17 since he has been incarcerated:

18

a. Qualified ASL Interpreters. The BOP must provide "qualified

19

interpreters" to Bryant in connection with ''all programs and servi ces

20

provided to inmates at USP Tucson." The Recommended Decision

21

defines "qualified interpreters" as those whose qualifications have

22

been objectively verifi ed, s uch as those with certifications fro m the

23

National Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf, and excludes BOP staff

24

and inmates as "qualified interpreters." Jt states that "the standard to

25

be used in selecting interpreters" should be to use "the most availab le

26

certified interpreter, or when no certified interpreter is reasonably

27

available ... the services of an otherwise qualified interpreter. " Judge

28

Thomas found that live interpreters "are preferred whenever possible

- 18-

AMEN DED AND SUPPI.F..,\4ENTED COMPLAINT

• 00/00/2C0a1s3e 21:121: -1c9v:-20702F5A4X-C2A13S2-4D9T9B990DocumeNnAt T8lO9NWFIDileI::d L1E2G/A2L0/13 Page 21 of 25 Page ID #:1030

21

for medical appointments, disciplinary proceedings, o r o ther high

2

stakes settings." The BOP also must file quarterly reports with the

3

Complaint Adjudicatio n Officer fo r at least o ne year conceming its

4

provisio n of qualified interpreters. (Ex. B at 6, J6.)

5

b. Non-Aural Notification of Emergencies. The BOP is required to

6

"ensure that adequate notice is provided to [Bryant I of emergencies"

7

by using non-aural notifi cation systems, which may be an inmate

8

companio n and visual alam1s. The BOP also must provide Bryant

9

with training on the no n-aural notificati on systems. (/d. at 8, 15, 16.)

10

c. Telecommunications Device. The BOP must provide Bryant with

11

"access to telecommun ications that is comparable to the access

12

provided to hearing inmates." Judge Thomas found that the TTY

13

requires knowledge of English, that Bryant cannot commun icate

14

effecti vely in English, that the TIY is "rapidl y becoming obso lete,"

15

that Bryant can communicate effectively in ASL, that videophones

16

allow Bryant to communi cate in ASL and are a "superio r method [of

17

telecommunication! in all respects," and that videophones would not

18

present any security co ncerns when used in conjunction with a video

19

re lay service (VRS). The BOP therefore shou ld "ex plore the

20

possibility of impleme nting the [videophone] technology with all

21

deliberate speed." Nonetheless, Judge Thomas held that the BOP

22

could satisfy its obligations under the Rehabilitation Act by providing

23

Bryant with meaningfu l access to a TTY. Judge Thomas therefore

24

directed the BOP to provide Bryant with increased access to a TIY

25

equa l to that of hearing inmates, includ ing access in the evenings and

26

on weekends. (ld. at 4, 7-9, 11 , 17.)

27

d. Hearing Aids and Closed-Captioning. The BOP must comply with

28

the re lief ordered in the Letter of Findings. (/d. at 17 .)

- 19-

/\MENDED AND SUPPLEMENTED COMPLAINT

• • 00/00/2C0a1s3e 21:121:-1c9v:-?0.702F5A4X-C2A13S2-4D9T9B990DocumeNn/t\T8T9ONWFTilDeEd L1E2G/2A0L/13 Page 22 of 25 Page ID #:1031

22

e. Scope and Implementation. The remedies ordered "are to be

2

imple me nted effective immediately upon issuance of a final order."

3

The Recommended Decision creates "a rebuttable presumption that

4

the same remedies wi ll accompany [B ryant] and be made available to

5

him" wherever he is transferred. (!d. at 19.)

6

f. Attorneys' Fees . Under 29 U.S.C. § 794a(b), the prevailing party in a

7

mandatory adm inistrative proceed ing is entitled to recover reasonable

8

attorneys' fees, but Judge Thomas concluded that she was not

9

authori zed to award such fees. Bryant thus was directed to request his

10

attomeys' fees from the District Court. (!d. at 17- 18.)

I I

55. On July I0, 20 13, Bryant ft led a Iimited exception to the

12 Recommended Decision (attached hereto as Exhibit C). Bryant challenged Judge 13 Thomas's conclusion that the BOP could compl y with the Rehabilitation Act's

14 requirements to provide meaningfu l access to the BOP's telecommunications 15 program equal to that of hearing indi viduals by providing him with onl y TTY

I 6 access. Bryant noted that the following factual findings were incompatible with a

17 legal conclusion that the BOP can satisfy its obligations by providing Bryant with 18 TTY access:

19

• "fT)he extent of fBryant 'sl mastery o f written Eng lish has thus far

20

remained at the le vel of the very early primary grades" (Ex. B at 4);

21

• TTYs rely on a user's ability to communicate in English and are

22

"rapidly becoming an obsolete technology" (id. at 9, I I, 14);

23

• A videophone "enables ASL users to communicate with voice

24

telephone users through video rather than typed te xt" and, unlike a

25

TTY, does not rely on Bryant's Eng lish to communicate (id. at 9, 11 )~

26

• Videophones provide for much more efficient communication

27

between ASL and English speakers (id. );

28

-20-

A MENDED AND SUPPLEM ENTED CO~! PLAINT

• 00/00/2C0a1s3e 21:121: -1c9v:-20702F5A4X-C2A13S2-4D9T9B990DocumeNnAt T8I9ONWFIiDleEd L1E2G/2/\L0/13 Page 23 of 25 Page ID #:1032

23

•

I Videophones with access to YRS arc "a superior !teleco mmunication]

2

m ethod in all respects for David Bryant" {id.):

3

•

The tec hnology needed for YRS is the same as the tech no logy needed

4

for VR I, "a capacity that by now should be up and running at USP

5

Tucson" (id. at 9, 14); and

6

•

Secu rity concern s over the use of vid eophones at US P T ucson "are

7

satis fied because the only number that needs to be called is the

8

number fo r the VRS servi ce, and the priso n has the ability to restric t

9

the tel ephone numbe rs that may be contacted by the service just as it

lO

does w ith the curre nt TTY relay system" (id. at 9).

II

56. On Jul y 19, 20 J 3, the BOP submitted a re ply to Bryant's excepti ons

12 (the " Re ply," attac hed hereto as Exhibit D). The BOP disagreed with Bryant that a

13 v ideophone is required under the Rehab ilita tio n Act. The Reply stated that "Judge

14 Thomas prov ided a thorough and well-documented anal ysis o f this case" and

15 " urge[dl the Complaint Adjudication Officer to adopt in full Judge Thomas's

16 Recomme nded Decis ion." (Ex. D at 1.) This inc ludes the findings above

17 concerning Bryant 's disability, the ineffectiveness of the TTY, the effectiveness of 18 the videophone with YRS, as well as all of Judge Thomas's findings, conclusions 19 and remedies with respec t to th e various non-telecommunications a uxiliary aids 20 and accommodations soug ht by Bryant, including attorneys' fees.

21

57. On Septe mber 4, 2013, the Complaint Adjudication O ffi cer issued the

22 Administrative Decis ion (attached he reto as Exhibit E). In the cover le tter

23 e nclosing the Admini strative Dec ision , the Complaint Adjudication Officer noted

24 " thi s decision is the last ste p in the administrative process, with no furthe r right of

25 administrative a ppeal." (Ex. E, Le tter at 1.) The Administrative Decision full y

26 adopts the factua l findin gs, legal conclusions and proposed re medies in the

27 Recomme nded Decis ion (with o ne immate rial except ion). It includes a longer
28

-2 1-

AMENDED AND SUPPLE~ENTEO COMPLAINT

00/00/2C0a1s3e 21:121: -1c9v:-20702F5A4X-C2A13S2-4D9T9B990DocumeNnAt T8I9ONWFIiDleEd L1E2G/2AL0/13 Page 24 of 25 Page ID #:1033 24

~1 discuss ion of whether the Rehabilitation Act requires the BOP to prov ide Bryant

2 with access to VRS that was un supported by the admini strative record and the law.

3

58. C ritically, the Adminis trative Decision also states that Bryant is a

4 "prevailing party" and instructs him to seck atto rneys' fees with thi s Court. (!d. at

5 12.)

6 7

F.

RADecelfcieoenfm.dmanotdsaPtiroonvsidaendBrCyoannttinwuitehtoInFcaoinl stiostPenrot vAiduexiOliathreyrAOidrsdearnedd

8

59. After years of Defendants depri ving Bryan t of required auxiliary aids

9 and accommodations, De fendants recently have begun provid ing Bryant wi th

lO many of the requested auxiliary aids and accommodations sought and ordered in

11 the Administrative Decision. Tn the past several months, Defendants have started

12 providing Bryant wi th qualified ASL interpreters for scheduled medical

13 appointments and rehabilitative programs. De fendants insta ll ed a VRl sys tem at

14 USP Tucson so that interpreting serv ices can be provided to Bryant both in-perso n

15 as we ll as through YR I. Defendants allowed Bryant increased access to the TTY,

I6 but only on weekdays. Defendants also installed a blue flashing light in Bryant's

17 hous ing unit and fl ashing amber lights o n the guard tower in the recreation yard

18 and assigned Bryant an "inmate companion" in an attempt to better notify him of

I9 e mergencies and o ther impo rtant announcements. Defendants further installed

20 several te levisions in Bryant's hous ing unit o n which they enabled closed-

21 captioning.

22

60. Ho wever, Bryant has serious concerns about Defendants' commitment

23 to maintain these efforts in the future or at other institutions in the absence of an

24 order from thi s Court requiring this relief. Each of the concess ion s obtained from

25 De fendants was the direct res ult of judic ial scrutiny, including efforts by the

26 Honorable David T. Bristo w who has overseen a years- long med iation between the

27 parties, and Judge Thomas in the Administrative Process.

28

-22-

AMENDED AND SUPPLEMENTED COMPLAINT

00/00/2C0a1s3e 21:121: -1c9v:-20702F5A4X-C21A3S2-4D9T99B90DocumeNnAtT8IO9NWFIiDleEd L1E2G/A2L0/13 Page 25 of 25 Page ID #:1034 2S

61. Indeed, even after the Letter of Findings, the Recommended Dec ision

2 and the Admin istrative Decision were issued, and Defendants endorsed them,

3 Defendants failed to comply with thei r terms. Most recen tly, Defe ndants have

4 failed to comply with these orders by postponing educatio nal courses in which

5 Bryant has tried to enroll, including aGED course, because they fa iled to locate

6 and provide Bryant with qua lified ASL interpreters despite having had years to do

7 so. As of the date of this fi li ng, it is still unc lear when these courses wi ll begin.

8

62. Defendants did not provide Bryant with a qualified ASL interpreter

9 during his most recent appointment with an audiologist. When his hearing aid

I0 began emitting feedback and not working properly, Defendants failed to reso lve

II the issue and provide Bryant with a properly function ing hearing a id. D efendants

12 have also fai led to provide Bryant with access to a TTY in the evenings and on the

13 weekends. This record, coupled with Defendants' propensity to transfer Bryant

14 instead of prov iding him with requi red auxiliary aids and accommodations,

15 evidences a strong likelihood that Defendants wi ll continu e to fail to comply with

16 the Rehabi litation Act and th e U.S. Constitution absent a Court o rder.

17

63. Additionally, Bryant is being denied other auxiliary aids and

18 accommodations required under the Rehabilitation Act and U.S. Constitution.

19 Des pite Bryant only being able to communi cate effectively in ASL and requiring a

20 videophone to telecommunicate in ASL, including with his famil y and attorneys,

2 1 the BOP refuses to provide him with access to a videophone. Bryant thus does not

22 have meaningful access to the prison's telephone program o n an equal bas is with

23 his fellow hearing inmates in vio lation of the Rehab ilitation Act and Constitution.

24 The factual findings in the Administrative Decision compel a conclusion that

25 Defendants must provide Bryant with access to a videophone.

26

64. Additionally, the auxiliary aids and accommodations that Defendants

27 are currently prov iding Bryant for notificatio n of emergencies and o ther important

28 prison announcements do not provide Bryant with notice that is equal to that of

-23-

AMENDED AND SUPPLEM ENTED COMPLAINT

00/00/2013Cas1e2 2: 1:191: 2-c7v-F0A0X25241-3C24A9S9-9D9T0 B DocuNmATeInOtN8W9I-D1E IF.EilGeAdI,12/20/13 Page 1 of 28 Page ID #:1035

26

hearing inmates. Onl y a vibrating pager and visual paging system can provide 2 Bryant with the same information provided to hearing individuals through auditory 3 instructions and announcements and prevent Bryant from be ing placed in a 4 position of dependence o n another inmate.

5

65. Finally, Bryant seeks to recover hi s attorneys' fees and cos ts for

6 bringing this action and prevailing in the Admin istrative Process o rdered by the

7 Court.

8

CLAIMS FOR RELIEF

9 10

COUNT 1: (29 U.S.C.

(V§QI7UO9A4LLAEITTFIISEOEINOY.OA) SFALGTIHANIETNERSRETPHARALEBLTIDLEIERTFSAE)TNIDOANNATCST

I I

66. Bryant rea lleges and incorporates by reference each and every

12 a llegation above as if full y set fo rth herein.

13

67. Bryant is deaf and a qualifi ed indi vidual with a disability within the

14 meaning of the Rehabilitation Act.

15

68. The BOP is an executive agency within the mean ing of the

16 Rehabilitation Act. A ll of the operati ons of the BOP at each o f its correcti onal

17 fac ilities throughout the country, including US P Canaan, USP Coleman I, USP

18 Hazelton, USP Victorv ille and USP Tucson, arc programs or activities conducted

19 by an executi ve agency within the meanin g of the Rehabilitation Act. At all times

20 re levant to this action, the Rehabilitati on Act was in full force and effect in the

2 1 United States, and Bryant had and has a ri ght not to be subjected to discrimination

22 by Defendants on the basis of his di sability or on the basis of his seeking redress

23 for Defendants' violations of the Rehabilitation Act.

24

69. De fendants have routinely fa iled to provide Bryant with a qualified

25 ASL interpreter, see 28 C.F.R. § 35 .104, resulting in Bryant be ing:

26

•

unable to communicate effecti vely with healthcare providers and

27

mental health professionals, raise medical issues, discuss mental

28

-24-

AMENDED AND SUPPLEMENTED COMPLAINT

00/00/2013Cas1e2 2: 1:191: -2c"/v-F0A0X25241-3C24A9S9-9D9T0B DocuNmAeTInOtN8W9I-D1E LFEilGeAdL12/20/13 Page 2 of 28 Page ID #:1036

27

health problems or understand the treatments and medications

2

prescribed fo r him~

3

•

excluded from participating in the same educational, vocational, and

4

rehabili tative programs and activities as hearing prisoners~

5

•

unable to communicate effectively with correctional officers;

6

•

subject to disciplinary action stemming from Defendants' refusal to

7

accommodate his deafness~ and

8

•

confined to the SHU. often for indefinite periods of time.

9

70. Defendants' failure to provide Bryant with qualifi ed ASL interpreters

10 as necessary to ensure effective communicatio n has denied, and continues to deny,

II Bryant on the bas is of his deafness the same access to Defendants' services,

12 benefits, acti vities, programs and privileges that is afforded to hearing individuals.

13 This fa ilure to provide qualified interpreters as necessary to ensure effect ive

I 4 communication, and the resulting fa ilure to provide equal and meaningful access to

15 the serv ices, benefits, activities, programs and priv ileges of the BOP, is the res ult

16 of the regular and institutional policies, practices and/or customs or Defendants.

17 These failures have been ongoing.

18

7 l . As a proximate result of Defendants' violations of the Rehabilitatio n

19 Act, Bryant has suffered, and continues to suffer, di scrimin ation, unequa l

20 treatment, exclusion (including exclusion from Defendants' services, benefits,

21 acti vities, programs and privileges), fina ncial loss, loss of dignity, frustratio n,

22 humiliation, emotional pain and suffering, anxiety, trauma, embarrassment,

23 unnecessary loss of rights and privileges (including unnecessary d isciplinary

24 measures), segregati on and lockdown, serious injury to his health and mental

25 health (including the injuries specified herein), as well as an unnecessary risk of

26 serious injury to his heal th and mental hea lth. Defendants' failure to provide

27 Bryant wi th qualified ASL interpreters wi ll continue to result in harm to Bryant, as

28 Bryant will be in the custody or supervision of the BOP for the rest of his life and

-25-

AMENDf:D AND SUPPLEMENTED COMPLAINT

00/00/2013Cas1e2 2: 1:191: -?.c"1v-F0A0X252413-C24A<S19-9D9T0B DocuNmATeInOtN8W9I-D1E LFEi.l:GeAdL 12/20/13 Page 3 of 28 Page ID

28

#:1037

will continue to attempt to use the services, benefits, activ ities. programs and

2 privi leges provided by the BOP and to which he is entitled. This harrn will

3 continue and/or has a reasonable likel ihood to recur unless and until Defendants

4 arc ordered by th is Court to modify their policies, practices and procedures.

5

72. Tho ug h in recent months Defendants ha ve provided Bryant with

6 qualified AS L in terpreters at times, these actions have been in the context o f

7 constant judicial and administrative scrutiny and, even under this scrutiny, have not

8 extended to all prog rams and servi ces they have provided Bryant. Further, when

9 no t under this scrutin y, Defendants continua lly failed to provide Bryru1t with

lO qual ified ASL interpreters. Defendants' deficiencies in terms of compli ance with

11 adm inistrative orders and the Rehabilitation Act have a reasonab le likelihood of

12 continuing or recurring in the future whether Bryant remai ns at USP Tu cson or is

13 transferred to another BOP fac ility, as the BOP has stated li kely will occur again.

14

COUNT II: VIOLATION OF THE REHABILITATION ACT

IS

(29 U.S.C. § 794 ET SEQ.) AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS (NON-AURAL NOTIFICATION SYSTEM)

16

73 . Bryant realleges and incorporates by reference eac h and every

17 allegation above as if fully set forth herein.

18

74. Defendants have routinely failed to prov ide Bryant with any no n-au ral

19 notification system, and continue to fail to prov ide Bryant with his preferred non-

20 aural notification system of a vibrating pager o r a visual paging system, resu lting

21 in Bryant being deprived o f knowledge of prison-wide safety or e mergency

22 announcements, as well as knowledge of counts, mea ls and o ther important events.

23

75. Defendants' failure to provide Bryant with any no n-aural notificati o n

24 sys tem sufficient to ensure effecti ve co mmunication has denied, and continues to

25 deny, Bryant on the basis of hi s deafness the sa me access to Defendants' serv ices,

26 benefits, activities, programs and privileges that is afforded to hearing individuals.

27 The failure to provide a non-aural notification sys tem suffic ien t to ens ure effecti ve

28 communicatio n, and the resulting fa ilure to prov ide equal and meaningfu l access to

-26-

A M E:"IIDED AND SUPPLEMENTED COMPLAINT

• 00/00/201C3 as1e22: 1:191: -2c7v-F0A0X25?4.1-3C2A49S9-9D9T0B

DocuNmAeTInOtN8W9I-D1E LFEilGe/d\L12/20/13 #:1038

Page 4 of 28

Page ID

29

the services, benefits, activities, programs and privileges of the BOP, is the resu lt 2 o f the regular and institutional policies. practices and/o r customs of Defendants. 3 These failures have been o ngoin g.

4

76. As a prox imate resul t of Defendants' violations o f the Rehabi litati on

5 Act, Bryant has suffered, and continues to suffer, discrimination, unequal

6 treatment, exclusion (including exclusion from Defendants' serv ices, benefits,

7 activities, programs and priv ileges), loss of dignity, frus trati o n, humi liation,

8 emoti onal pain and s uffering, anx iety, trauma, e mbarrass ment , unnecessary loss of

9 rights and pri vileges (i ncluding unnecessary di sciplinary measu res), segregatio n

10 and lockdown, and serious injury to his health and mental health (including the

I I inj uries specified herein), as we ll as an unnecessary risk of serious injury to his

12 health and menta l health. Defendants' failure to provide Bryant with a non-aura l

13 notification system suffi c ient to ensure effective communication will continue to

14 result in hmm to Bryant, as Bryant will be in the custody or supervisio n of the BOP

15 for the rest of his life and w ill continue to attempt to use the servi ces, benefi ts,

16 activities, programs and privileges provided by the BOP and to which he is

17 entitled. This harm will continue and/or has a reasonable likelihood to recur unl ess

J8 and until Defendants are ordered by this Court to modify their policies, practices

19 and procedures.

20

77. Though in recent months Defendants have provided Bryant with a

21 non-aural notification system in the form of a flashing blue light in Bryant's

22 housing unit, flashing amber lights on the guard tower in the recreation yard , and

23 an inmate companion , these actions have been in the context of constant judicial

24 and administrati ve scrutiny. When not under this scrutiny, Defendants continually

25 fail ed to provide Bryant with any non-aural notification system , let alone one

26 s ufficient to ensure effective communication. Defendants' deficienci es in terms of

27 comp liance with administrative orders and the Rehabilitation Act have a

28 reasonable likelihood of continui ng or recurring in the future whether Bryant

-27-

AMEI\DED AND SUPPLEME~TED COMPLAINT

00/00/2013Cas1e2 2: 1:191: -2c7v-F0A0X25241-3C2A49S9-9D9T0B DocuNmATe1n0tN~819I-D1E LFEilGeAdL 12/20/13 Page 5 of 28 Page ID #:1039

remains at USP Tucson or is transfen ed to another BOP fac il ity, which the BOP 2 has stated likely w ill occur again.

3 4

COUNT III: (29 U.S.C.

§V7I9O4L(ECATLTOSIESOEQNf.>)O-ACFGATAPHITNEIOSRTNEAIHNLAGLB) DI LEIFTEANTDI OANNTASC T

5

78. Bryant realleges and incorporates by reference each and every

6 allegati on above as if fu ll y set fo rth herein.

7

79. Defendants have routinely fai led to prov ide B ryant with access to

8 closed-ca ptioned television, or to Lake reasonable steps to ensure he has safe access

9 to it, and cont inue to fa il to prov ide Bryant with safe access to closed -captioned

I 0 television. resulting in Bryant being forced to choose between being attacked by

I J other inmates for attempting to enable closed-captio ning or to watch programmin g

12 without closed-captioning in order to avo id s uch attacks.

13

80. Defendants' failure to provide Bryant with safe access to closed-

14 captioned television has den ied , and continues to deny, Bryant on the basis of his

15 deafness the sa me access to Defendants' services, benefits, activities, programs and

16 privileges that is afforded to hearing indi viduals. The failure to provide safe access

17 to closed-capt ioned telev ision, and the resu lting fail ure to provide equal and

18 mean ingful access to the services, benefits, activities, programs and privileges of

19 the BOP, is the result of the regul ar and institutional policies, practices and/or

20 custo ms of Defendants. These fa il ures have been ongoing.

21

8 1. As a proximate result o f Defendants' vio lations of the Rehabilitation

22 Act, Bryant has suffe red, and continues to suffer, di scrimin ation, unequal

23 treatment, exclusion (including exclusion from Defendants' services, benefits,

24 activities, programs and privileges), loss of dignity, fru stratio n, humiliatio n,

25 emotional pain and suffering, anxiety, trauma, c mbanassment, and serio us injury

26 to his health and mental health (incl udin g the injuries specified herein), as well as

27 an unnecessary risk of serious injury to his health and mental health. Defendants'

28 fa ilure to provide Bryant with safe access to closed-captioned telev ision will

-28-

/\MENDED AND SUPPLEMENTED COMPLA INT

• • 00/00/2013Cas1e2 2: 1:191: 2-c7v-F0A0X25?4.1-3C2A49S9-9D9T0B DocuNmAeTInOtN8W9I-D1E LFFi:lGeAdL12/20/13 Page 6 of 28 Page ID #:1040

continue to result in harm to Brya nt, as Bryant will be in the c ustod y or s u pervision 2 o f the BOP for the rest of his life and will continue to attempt to usc the services, 3 be nefits, ac tiv ities, prog ra ms a nd priv ileges prov ided by the BOP a nd to which he 4 is e ntitled. This harm will continue and/o r has a reasonable likelihood to recur 5 unless and until Defe ndants are orde red by thi s Court to modify their poli cies, 6 practices a nd procedures.

7

82. Though in recent months Defendants prov ided Bryant with access to

8 c losed-captio ned telev is ion by purchas ing and installing ne w te lev is ions a t USP

9 Tucson, these actions have been in the conte xt o f constant judic ial a nd

I 0 administrati ve scrutiny. Whe n no t unde r thi s scrutiny, Defe ndants continually

II fail ed to prov ide Brya nt with any access to closed-captioned telev is ion , let alone

12 sa fe access to it. De fe nda nts' defic ie nc ies in te rms of compliance wi th

13 admini strati ve o rde rs a nd the Rehabilita ti on Ac t have a reasonable likelihood of

14 continuing or recurring in the future wh ether Bryant re mains a t USP Tucson or is

L5 tra nsferred to a nothe r BOP fac ility, whic h the BOP has stated like ly will occur

16 ag am.

17
18

COUNT IV: (29 U.S.C.

§V7I9O4LEATTS(IHOEEONA.)ORAFIGNTAGHIANEISRDTESA)HLALBDILEIFTEANTDIOANNTASCT

I 9

83. Bryant realleges and incorporates by reference each and every

20 allegation above as if fully set forth here in.

21

84. De fend a nts have routinely fa iled to provide Bryant with fun ctioning

22 hearing aids and repl aceme nt hearing aid batteries on an as-needed bas is , a nd

23 co ntinue to fail to prov ide Bryant with a fun c tio ning hearing aid, resulting in

24 Bryant being unable to sense hi s s urroundings and be ing exposed to an

25 unnecessary ri sk of serious physical harm.

26

85. Defend ants' fa ilure to prov ide Bryant with functioning hearing aids

27 a nd re placeme nt hearing aid batte ri es on an as- needed basis has d eni ed , a nd

28 continues to deny, Bryant o n the bas is o f his d eafness the same access to

-29-

AMENDED AN D SUPPLEMENTED COMPLA INT

00/00/201C3 as1e22: :1191:-2c7v-0FA0X25241-3C2A49S9-9D9T0B DocuNmAeTInOtN8W9T-D1E FLFi.l:eGAdL12/20/13 Page 7 of 28 Page ID #:1041

32

Defendants' services, benefits, activities, programs and privi leges that is afforded

2 to hearing indi viduals. The fai lu re to provide function ing hearin g aids and

3 replacement hea ring aid batteri es on an as-needed basis, and the resu lting fa ilure to

4 provide equal and meani ngful access to the serv ices, benefits, activities, programs 5 and privileges of the BOP , is the result of the regular and insti tutional pol icies,

6 pract ices and/or customs of Defendants. These fail ures have been o ngoing.

7

R6. As a proximate result o f Defendants' vio lat ions of the Rehab ilitation

8 Act, Bryant has suffered, and continues to suffe r, discriminati on, unequal

9 treatment, excl usion (including exclusion from Defendants' services, benefits,

10 activities, programs and pri vileges), loss of dignity, frus tration, humiliat io n,

II emotional pain and suffering, an xiety, trauma, e mbarTassment, and an u nnecessary 12 ri sk o f serio us injury to hi s health and menta l health. Defendants' fa ilure to

13 prov ide Bryan t wi th functioning hearing aids and rep lacement hearing aid batteries 14 o n an as-needed basis will continue to result in harm to Bryant, as Bryant will be in 15 the custody or supervision of the BOP for the rest of his li fe and will continue to 16 attempt to use the services, benefits, activ ities, programs and privileges provided

17 by the BOP and to which he is entitled. This harm will conti nue and/or has a

18 reasonabl e like Iihood to recur unl ess and until Defendants are ordered by this 19 Court to modify their policies, practices and procedures.

20

87. Though in recent months Defendants prov ided Bryant with hearing

2 1 aids and replacement hearing aid batteries on an as-needed basis at times, these

22 acti ons have been in the contex t o f constant judicial and admi nistrative scrutiny.

23 When not under this scrutiny, De fendants continuall y fail ed to provide Bryant with 24 fun ctio ning hearing aids and/or replacement hearing aid batteries on an as-needed 25 basis. Defendants' deficiencies in terms o f compliance wi th administrative orders

26 and the Rehabi litation Act have a reasonable likelihood of continuing or recurring 27 in the future whether Bryant remains at US P Tucson or is transferred to another

28 BOP faci lity, wh ich the BOP has stated likely w ill occur again.

-30-

AMENDED AND SUPPLEMENTED COMPLAINT

00/00/201C3 as1e22: :1191: -2c7v-F0A0X25241-3C2A49S9-9D9T0B DocuNmAeT1n0tN8W9T-D1t. FLEilGeAdL12/20/13 Page 8 of 28 Page ID #:1042

33

2

COUNT V: (29 U.S.C.

§V7IO9(T4LTEAYTTSISOEANON.D)OAFVGITDAHEIENOSRPTHEHOANALLE8ISDI)-E1FTEANTDIOANNATSCT

3

88. Bryant rca lleges and incorporates by reference each and eve ry

4 allegatio n above as if fully set fort h here in.

5

89. Defe ndants have routinely fai led to prov ide Bryant with meaningful

6 access to any TOO, and continue to fail to provide Bryant with his preferred TDD

7 of a videophone, resulting in Bryant bein g prevented from contacting family,

8 friends and hi s cou nsel and being pre ve nted from effective ly communicating with

9 them even when contact is permitted.

10

90. Defendants' fai lure to provide Bryant with meaningful access to a

II TOO suffici ent to ensure e ffective communi ca tio n has denied , and continues to

12 deny, Bryant on the bas is o f his deafness the same access to Defendants' services,

13 benefits, activities. programs and privileges that is afforded to hearing individua ls.

14 The failu re to prov ide meaning ful access to a TDD suffici ent to ensure effective

15 communication, and the resu lting failure to provide equal and meaningfu l access to

16 the services, benefits, act ivities, programs and privileges of the BOP, is the result

17 of the regular and institutional policies, practices and/or customs of Defendants.

18 These failures have been ongoing.

19

91. As a proximate result of De fendants' violations of the Rehabi lit ation

20 Act, Bryant has suffered, and continues to s uffer, discrimination, unequal

21 treatment, exclusion (including exclusion fro m De fendants' services, benefits,

22 activities, programs and privileges), financial loss, loss of d ignity, frustration ,

23 humiliation, emotional pain and suffering, anxiety, trauma , embarrassment,

24 unnecessary loss of rights and privileges (including unnecessary disciplinary

25 measures), and injury to his mental hea lth (including the injuries specifi ed herein).

26 Defendants ' failure to provide Bryant wi th meaningful access to a TOO suffi cient

27 to ensure effective communication will continue to result in harm to Bryant, as

28 Bryant will be in the custody or supervision o f the BOP for the rest of his life and

-3 1-

AMENDED AND SUPPLEMENTED COMPLAINT

00/00//.01C3 as1e22: 1:191: -2c7v-F0A0X25?4.1-3C2A49S9-9D9T0B DocuNmAeTInOtN8W9I-D1E LFEiGleAdL12/20/13 Page 9 of 28 Page ID #:1043

34

will continue to attempt to usc the services, benefits, activ ities. programs and

2 privileges provided by the BOP and to which he is entitled. This harm wi ll

3 continue and/or has a reasonable likelihood to recur unless and unti l Defendants

4 are o rdered by this Court to modify the ir policies, practices and procedures.

5

92. Though in recent months Defendants provided Bryant with increased

6 access to a TTY o n weekdays, these actions have been in the context of co nstan t

7 judic ial and administrati ve scrutiny, and, even under this scrutiny, Defendants have

8 failed to provide Bryant with access to a TTY in the evenings and on the weekends

9 as requ ired by the Administrati ve Decision. When not under th is scrut in y,

10 Defendants continuall y failed to prov ide Bryant with meaningful access to any

11 TOO, let alone a videophone-the on ly TDD that ensu res Bryant has th e same

I2 ab ility to engage in clear and effective commun icatio n with ind ividua ls remotely as

13 hea ring inmates in Defendants' custody. Defendants' deficiencies in terms of

14 compli ance with administrative o rders and the Rehabilitation Act have a

15 reasonable Iikelihood of continuing or recurring in the future whether Bryant

16 remains at USP Tucson or is trans ferred to another BOP facility, which the BOP

17 has stated li kely wi ll occur again.

18 19 20

(29 U.CS.OCU. §NC7T9O4VNHIS:TTVSITIEO8L.f)AiOATNN(IRODAENTTGOHAAFELINITFASHITTREISAORTLNELA)HMDAEEBNFIDEL~NIlTDAEANTNTITOTSNOATCHTE U.S.

21

93 . Bryant realleges and incorporates by reference each and every

22 allegation above as if fully set forth herein.

23

94. Defendants have further violated the Rehabilitation Act, as well as the

24 First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, by impermissibly retaliating against 25 Bryant for petitioning the govern ment and attempting to secure the rights to which

26 he is entitled under the Rehabilitation Act and the U.S. Constitutio n.

27

95. Defendants transferred Bryant from USP Hazelton to US P Co leman J,

28 from US P Coleman I to US P Victorville, from USP Victorvi lle to USP Canaan and

-32-

AMENDED 1\ND SUPPLEMENTED COMPLAINT

00/00/201C3as1e22: :1191:-2c7v-0fA0X25241-3C2A49S9-9D9T0B DocuNmATeInOtN8~H9D-F1. FLEilGeAdL12/20/13 Page 10 of 28 Page ID #:1044

fro m USP Canaan to USP Tucson. Upon information and belief, these transfers 2 had no legitimate purpose, but rather were s ubstantially motivated by Defendants' 3 desire to fmstrate Bryant's ex haustion of the administrative remedy process and 4 prevent his access to the court s ystem.

5

96. Defendants also have repeatedly placed Bryant in the S H U-often

6 inde finitely and without communicating to Bryant the bas is for his confin ement-

? following his attempts to utilize the prison 's interna l adm inistrati ve remed y

8 process. O n information and belief, Defendants' placement of Bryan t in th e SHU

9 o ften had no leg itimate purpose, but rather was substantiall y mo tivated by

10 Defendants' desire to avoid prov iding Bryant with the auxi li ary aids and

II accom modations that he was entitled to under the Re habilitation Act and U.S.

12 Constitution, and which he sought thro ug h the prison administrative remedy

13 process.

14

97. Defendants' reta liatio n against Bryant for exercising rights secured by

15 the Rehabi litation Act and the U.S. Constitution are the result of the regular and

16 institutional policies, practices and/or customs of Defendants. P rior to hi s trans fer

17 to USP Tucson, these retaliatory actions had been ongo ing.

l8

98. As a prox imate result of Defendants' v iolations of the Rehabilitation

19 Act and the First Amendment, Bryant has suffe red, and continues to suffer,

20 di scrimination, unequal treatment, exclusion (including exclusion from

2l Defendants' services, benefits, activities, programs and privileges), loss of dignity ,

22 frustration, humiliation, emotio nal pain and suffering, anxiety, trauma,

23 embarrassment, unnecessary loss of rig hts and privileges (including unnecessary

24 disciplinary measures), segregation and lockdown, and serious injury to his health

25 and mental health (including the injuries specified herei n), as well as an

26 unnecessary risk of serious injury to his health and mental health. Defendants'

27 retaliatory actions wi ll conti nue to result in harm to Brya nt, as Bryant will be in the

28 cus tody or supervis ion of the BOP for the rest of his life and will continue to

-33-

A MENDED AND SUPPLEMENTED COMPLAINT

• 00/00/201C3ase122::1191:-2c7v-0F0AX25241-C32A4S99-D99T0B

DocumNAeTnlOt N8W9-J1DE FLiEleGdAL12/20/13 #:1045

Page 11 of 28

Page ID

36

1 atte mpt to use the services, benefits, activities, programs and pri vi leges provided

2 by the BOP and to which he is entitled. This harm wi ll continue and/or has a

3 reasonable likelihood to recur unless and until Defendants arc ordered by th is

4 Court to modify their policies, practices and procedures.

5

99. T hough in recent months Defendants have ceased their retaliati on

6 against Bryant, this cessati on is in the context of constant judicial and

7 ad ministrative scrutiny. When not under this scrutin y. Defendants continuall y

8 retaliated aga inst Bryant by transferring him to various BOP facilities located

9 throughout the coun try and placing him in the S HU . These retaliatory actions have

I 0 a reasonable likelihood of resuming in the fu tu re whether Bryant remains at US P

11 Tucson o r is transferTed to anoth er BOP fac ility, which the BOP has stated likely

12 will occur again.

13 14

TOCOTUHNETUV.SI.IC:(ROVINIGOSHTLTIATTTUIOTOICNOONOMFAMTGUHANEINIFCSIATRTSAITLOLANM)DEEFNEDNMDEANNTTS

15

I00. Bryant rea lieges and incorporates by refe rence e ach and every

16 allegation above as if fully set forth herei n.

17

I0 l. Defendants have impermissibly deprived, and continue to deprive,

18 Bryant of his First Amendment right to communication by fai ling to provide him

19 wi th auxiliary aids and accommodations necessary for him to communicate

20 effecti vely with non-inmates.

21

I02. Hearing inmates in Defendants' custody have teleco mmuni cation

22 equipment that allo ws communication with non-inmates.

23

103. Because Bryant is housed in a re mote area far. from his family's

24 residence in Washington, D.C., and does not co mmunicate effecti vely in written or

25 s poke n English, written correspondence, personal visi ts and TTYs are not adequate

26 alternati ves for exercising h is First Amendment right to communicate with friends,

27 famil y and attorneys.

28

-34-

/\MENDED AND SUPPLEMENTED COMPLAINT

• 00/00/201C3ase122::1191:-2cv/ -0FA0X25241-C32A4S99-D99T0B

DocumNAeTnIOt N8W9-ID1E FLFil:eGdAL12/20/13 #:1046

Page 12 of 28

Page ID

37

104. On account of his disability, Bryant requires a videophone with VRS 2 in order to ha ve the same level of communication with non-inmates that hearing 3 prisoners have.

4

LOS. Defendants' refusal to provide Bryant with a videophone serves no

5 legitimate or compelling penological need and is not rationally related or narrowly

6 tailored to any identified penological need. Provision of appropriate

7 teleco mmun ication equipment to Bryant would have neglig ible effec ts, if any, on

8 other inmates and prison employees.

9

l06. Defendants' fai lure to comply with the first Amend ment has resulted

I 0 and will continue to res ult in harm to Bryant, un less and until Defendants are

ll ordered by th is Court to modi fy thei r policies, practices and procedures.

12

l07. Though in recent months Defe ndants provided Bryant with increased

13 access to a TTY on weekdays, these actions have been in the contex t of constant

l4 judicial and administrati ve scrutiny, and, even under this scrutin y, Defendants have 15 failed to provide Bryant with access to a TTY in the evenings and on the weekends 16 as required by the Administrati ve Decision. When not under this scrutiny.

17 Defendants continually failed to provide Bryant with meaningful access to any l8 TDD, let al one a videophone-the onl y TDD that ensures Bryant has the same

19 ability to engage in clear and effective communication with individuals remotely 20 that is provided to hearing inmates in Defendants' custody. Defendants'

2 l defi ciencies in terms of compliance with administrative orders and the U.S.

22 Constitution have a reasonable likelihood of continuing or recurring in the future

23 whether Bryant remains at USP Tucson or is transferred to another BOP facility,

24 which the BOP has stated likely will occur again.

25 I I I

26 I I I

27 I I I

28 I I I

-35-

A M ENDED AND SUPPLEMENTED COMPLAINT

• 00/00/201C3as1e22: :1191:-2c7v-0FA0X25241-!C2•A1S99-D99T0B

DocuNmAeT nIOtN8W9I-D1!·: FLEilGeAdL12/20/13 #:1047

Page 13 of 28

Page ID

38

COUNT VIII: VIOLATION OF THE FIFTH AMENDMENT TO THE U.S. CONSTITUTION AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS 2 (INFORMED CONSENT; DEPRIVATION OF LIBERTY WITHOUT
PROCESS) 3

4

I 08. Bryant realleges and in corpo rates by re ference each and every

5 allegatio n above as if full y set forth here in.

6

109. Defendan ts have vio lated the Fifth Amendment by prov iding Bryant

7 with medical and psychiatric care witho ut his infmmed consent.

8

II 0. Defendants systemati cally den ied Bryant the means o f effect ive

9 communi catio n, including the services o f a qualified AS L interpreter, which arc

I 0 necessary to allo w Bryant to understand and co mmunicate w ith medical staff and

I J men tal health professionals. Without these aux iliary aids and accommodations,

12 Bryant was and is unable to understand , and thus g ive hi s in fo nned consent to, any

13 and all medi ca l treatment, includ ing psyc ho logical treatment, to which he has been

14 s ubjected by De fendants and their employees.

15

I I I . Defendants have furth er vio lated the Fift h Amendment by trans ferring

16 Bryant to the S HU and failing to inform him o f the reason fo r hi s detention w ith

17 the aid o f a qualified ASL interpreter. Defe ndants also have not afforded Bryant

18 status hearings concerning his placement in the SHU.

J 9

I I 2. Defendants ' failure to provide Bryant with qualified ASL interpreters

20 as necess ary to ensure informed consent serves no leg itimate o r co mpelling

2 1 peno logical need and is no t rationally re lated or narrow ly ta ilo red to any identified

22 peno logical need . In addition , Defendants' tra nsfers o f Bryant to the SHU and

23 further failure to provide him with status hearings concerning his placement in the

24 SHU serve no leg itimate or co mpelling peno log ical need and are not rati onally

25 related or narrowly tailored to any identified penological need . Likewise,

26 Defendants' fa ilure to inform Bryant for the reason for his detenti on in the SHU

27 with the aid o f a qualified ASL interpreter serves no leg itimate or compelling

28

-36-

AMENDED AND SUPPLEMENTED COMPLAINT

• 00/00/201C3ase122::1191:-2c7v-0FA0X25241-C32A4S99-D99T0B

DocumNAeTnI tON8'9tJ-l1OE #:1048

FLiEleGAdL12/20/13

Page 14 of 28

Page ID

39

penological need and is not rationally related or narrowly tail ored to any identifiect 2 penological need.

3

I J3. D efendants' failure to comply with the Fifth Amendment has resulted

4 and will continu e to res ult in harm to Bryant, unless and until Defendants are

5 ordered by this Court to modify their policies, practices and procedures.

6

11 4. Though Defendants at times provided Bryant with qualified ASL

7 interpreters in recent months and in the preceding two years have ceased their

R practice of confining Bryant to the SHU, this cessation is in the context of constant 9 judicial and admi ni strative scrutiny. When not under this scrutiny, Defendants

I 0 have continuall y failed to provide Bryant with qua lifi ed AS L interpreters as

II necessary to ensure infom1ed consent and repeated ly placed him in the SHU

12 without any explanation and without the abi lity to cha llenge that placement.

13 Defendants' deficiencies in term s of compliance with administrative orders and the 14 Fifth Amendment have a reasonable likelihood o f continuing or recurring in the 15 future whether Bryant rem ains at USP Tucson or is tran sferred to another BOP 16 facility, as the BOP has stated likely will occ ur again.

17 18 19

TCOOTUHN(EUTNUIXR.SDE:.IACSVPOSIROONONLSPAATOIBTTRILUOTETNIROIOOINSNFAKTATOHGEFEAPPIUENHINSGYITSSHHIATCMLHALELANDMHTEAE)FNREMNDDM; AENNTTS

20

11 5. Bryant realleges and incorporates by reference each and every

21 allegation above as if fully set forth herein.

22

11 6. Defendants have violated the Eighth Amendment prohibition against

23 cmel and unusua l punishment by syste matica lly denying Bryant access to basic

24 human services and vital information during his incarceration .

25

11 7. Defendants have failed to provide Bryant with the auxi li ary aids and

26 accommodations necessary to ensure Bryant has adequate notice of prison alerts,

27 announcements and safety instructions, which are necessary for Bryant' s safety. In

28 the past several years, Defendants have failed to provide Bryant with functioning

-37-

AM ENDED AND SUPPLEMeNTED COMPLAINT

• 00/00/201C3 as1e22: :1191:-2c7v-0FA0X25241-3C2A4 S99-fDJ9T0B

DocuNmI\eT nI Ot N8W9I-m1 : FLEilGeId\L12/20/13 #:1049

Page 15 of 28

Page ID

hearing aids and batteries for those dev ices on an as-needed bas is, which help

2 prov ide Bryant w ith a better sense o f h is surroundings and potenti al emergencies.

3 Moreover, they have failed to provide the means of effective communicati o n,

4 including the services of a qu ali fied ASL interpreter, to a llow Bryant to understand

5 and communicate with medi cal staff, menta l health professio na ls, correctio na l

6 officers and other members o f pri son sta ff w ith who m v ita l comm unications occ ur.

7

I 18. As a resu lt o f these failu res, Bryant has been s ubjected to d angerous

8 li v ing conditions where h e is vulnerable to assault and o ther hazards, and unable to

9 protect himse lf from these hazards or co mmunicate h is need for ass istance and

I0 protecti on. Bryant has also been prescribed completel y unnecessary

II psychopham1aco log ical drugs because De fendants fail ed to e nsure that medi ca l

12 staff and mental hea lth care professio nals are ab le to communicate effective ly with

13 him.

14

ll 9 . Defendants had kno wledge o f the dangerous and unconstitutional

15 conditions in which Bryant was li ving as a resu lt o f these fail ures. Bryant

16 submitted numerous written complaints to BOP staff and to BOP o ffic ials

17 throughout the country, reques ting that the BOP prov ide him w ith fun ctio ning

18 hearing aids and hearing aid balteries as needed , qualifi ed AS L interpreters and

19 o ther auxiliary aids and servi ces when he meets with medical staff and mental

20 health profess io nal s and engages in impo rtant commun icati ons with correctional

2 1 officers and other members o f prison staff and non-aural notification of

22 emergencies.

23

120. Defend ants' failure to comply with the Eig hth Amendment has

24 resulted and will continue to result in harm to Bryant, unless and unti l Defendants

25 are ordered by this Court to modify their poli cies, practi ces and procedures.

26

12 1. Defendants have fu rther v io lated the E ighth Amendment by

27 effecti vely keeping Bryant in a perpetua l state of so litary confinement and thereby

28 impos ing a punishment gross ly d isproportio nate to his crime.

-38-

AMENDED AND SUPPLEMENTED COMPLAINT

• 0 0 I 00 I 2 0 1C3ase122::1191:-2c7v-0F0AX25241-C32A4S<) -9D99T0B

DocumNAeTniottJ8W9J-1DE FLiEleGdAL12/20/13 #:1050

Page 16 of 28

Page ID

4 1

122. Defendants failed to provide Bryant with the auxiliary aids and 2 accommodations necessary to ens ure he is able to effectively communicate with 3 BOP staff, friends, family and his attorneys.

4

123. The deliberate and knowing refus al to provide means of effective

5 communication, including the services of a qualified ASL inte rpreter, to allow

6 Bryant to understand and co mmunicate with medica l staff and healthcare

7 providers, including mental health professionals and phannacists, educationa l and

8 vocational instructors, coiTectional officers, and other members of prison staff have

9 kept, and continue to keep, Bryant in solitary confinement. Defendants' prior

l0 refusal to provide Bryant an interpreter for educatio nal activities ensures that

11 Bryant's limited En glish language skills will remain as they are, keeping him in a

12 posi tion where he is unable to com municate with coiTectional officers, other

13 members of prison staff and his fellow inmates, thereby furthering hi s iso lation.

14

124. Defendants compounded these depri vations by placing Bryant in the

I 5 SHU for indefinite periods o f time, thereby further isolating him from hi s fellow

16 inmates and depriving him o f the privileges which he wo uld enjoy as part of the

17 prison's general population, including te lecommunicatio ns access.

18

125. Additionally, by punishing him for requesting the auxi liary aids and

19 accommodations to which he is entitled, Defendants have shown other deaf or

20 hearing impaired inmates with whom he mi ght otherwise communicate that it is to

2 1 their advantage to accept the status quo, not seek auxiliary aids and

22 accommodations for themse lves and not communicate with Bryant.

23

126. Defendants' failure to comply with the Eighth Amendment has

24 resulted and will continue to result in harm to Bryant, unless and until Defendants

25 are ordered by this Court to modify their policies, practices and procedures.

26

127. Though in recent months Defendants have provided Bryant with a

27 non-aural notification system, qualified ASL interpreters at times and improved

28 access to a TTY on weekdays, these actions have been in the context of constant

-39-

AME:>IDED AND SUPPLEMENTED COMPLAL"'T

00/00/201C3ase122::1191:-2c"v/ -0FA0X25241-3C2A4S99-D99T0B DocuNmAeTnlOt N8W9I-1DE FLiEleGdAl.12/20/13 Page 17 of 28 Page ID

42

#:1051

judicial and administrative scrutiny. When not under this scrutiny. Defendan ts

2 continually and systematically punished Bryant in manner di sproportionate to his

3 crimes. Defendants' deficiencies in terms of compli ance with ad ministrative

4 orders and the Eighth Amendment have a reaso nable likelihood of co ntinuing or

5 recurring in the future wheth er Bryant remains at US P Tucson or is transferred to

6 another BOP facility, which the BOP has stated likely will occur again.

7

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

8

WHEREFORE, Bryant respectfull y reques ts that:

9

A. The Court adjudge and decree that Defendants, by the organizat ions,

I 0 systems, policies, practices and conditi ons described above, ha ve violated and

ll continu e to violate Section 794 of the Rehabilitation Act and the Constitution of

12 the United States;

J 3

B. The CoUJt enter such injunctive and/or declaratory relief pursuant to

14 28 U.S .C. §§ 220 I and 2202, and Rules 57 and 65 o f the Federal Rul es of C ivil

15 Procedure against Defendants and in favor of Bryant as it dee ms appropriate to

16 re medy past violations of the laws of the United S tates and to prevent future

J7 violations of the sa me, including, but not limited to, an order requiring Defendants

18 to provide to Bryant the same remedies ordered by the Court at USP Tucson and

19 any and all BOP institutions to which he is transferred in the future, and including

20 a ll the auxi liary aids and accommodations Bryant seeks:

21

• access to a qualified AS L interpreter- i.e., a non-inmate, non-BOP

22

staff me mber who is objectively and independently detennined to be

23

"able to interpret effec tively, accurately and impartially both

24

receptively and express ively, using any necessary specialized

25

vocabulary"-for all programs and serv ices prov ided to inmates;

26

• a vibrating pager, visual paging system or other auxiliary aid capab le

27

of providing notification of emergencies and other important

28

announcements equivalent to hearing inmates;

-40-

AMENDED AND SUPPLEMENTED COM PLAINT

00/00/201C3ase122::1191:-2c7v-0FA0X25241-3C2A4S99-D99T0B

• DocumNAeTnIOt N8W9-ID1E FLiEleGdAL12/20/13 Page 18 of 28 #:1052

Page ID

43

•

properly functioning hearing aids and hearing batteries on an as-

2

needed basis~

3

•

access to a videophone with YRS equal to the access had by hearing

4

inmates to telephones; and

5

•

safe access to televisions with closed-captioning.

6

c. The Court retain jurisdiction of this matter until Defendants

7 demo nstrate that they have fully co mpli ed with the Administrat ive Decis ion and 8 any o rders of thi s Court, and until there is a reasonab le assurance that Defendants 9 will continue to comply in the future absent continuing Court oversight;

10

D. The Court enter judgment against Defendants in favor of Bryant for

I 1 the costs o f litigation both in this action and the Administrative Process, including

12 for recovery of his reasonable attorneys' fees under 29 U.S.C. § 794a(b); and

13

E. The Court award Bryant any further relief that the Court dee ms

14 appropriate.

15

16 Dated: December 20, 2013
17 18 19
20
21
22
23 24 25
26
27
28

Res pectfully sub mitte? /
_u:~ 1 I t-
ADAMS. PARIS (SBN 190693) parisa@sullcrom.com RORY P. CULV ER (SBN 27 1868) culvcrr@sullcrom.com 1888 Century Park East, Suite 2JOO Los Angeles, California 90067 Telephone: (3 10) 712-6600 Facsimile: (3 10) 712-8800
ANDREW E. GELFAND (pro hac vice)
gelfanda @sullcro m. com 125 Broad Street, 32nd Floor New York, New York 10004-2498 Telephone: (212) 558-4000 Facsimile: (2 12) 558-3588

-41-

AMENDED AND SUPPLEMENTED COMPLAINT

00/00/201C3ase1?2::1191:-2cv-0f'A0X25241-3C2A4S99-D99T0B DocuNmAeTnIOt N8W9-ID1E FLIi:l:eGdAL12/20/13 Page 19 of 28 Page ID #:1053

4 l

DEBORAH GOLDEN (pro hac vice)

Deborah_G o lden@was hl aw.org

2

Washington Lawyers' Committee for Civil

3

Rights and Urban Affairs

II Dupont Circle, N. W., Suite 400

4

Washington, D.C. 20036

5

Telephone: (202) 3 19-1000

Facs imile: (202) 3 19-lO JO

6

7

Attorneys for Plaintiff David Bryant

8

9

10

l I

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

-42-

AMENDED AND SUPPLEMENTED COMPLAINT

• • 00/00/201C3ase122::1191:-2c7v-0F0AX25?4.-1C32A4S9-9D99T0B DocumNAeTnIOt N8W9-ID1E FLiEleGdAL12/20/13 Page 20 of 28 Page ID #:1054

45

EXHIBIT A

• 0 0 / 0 0 / 2 0 1C3ase1 22::1191:-c2 v7 -0F0AX25241-C3 2A•1S(J-9D99T0B

DocumNAeTnItO8Nv9i-J1Df. FLiEleGdJ\L12/20/13 #:1055

Page 21 of 28

Page ID

46

::;el:.>crah Golc.k~:~ ~a sh~ngcon L~wyPl 's Cnmmittee 11 Dupont Circle ~~. Suit~ 1GC "tlar;hingtcm, DC: :.>OOJ~
:1a:rlan ?e:~n Reg1ona1 Coli:1Sel :Jesc.ern ~eg1o:-: Bureau or Pr:sons 7338 Shoreli:~e Urive
StockLO~, CA )5219

November 2, 2011

Ro: David Bryant, Rcg1ster ~umber 06701-106
!:etter oE_ Finding~------------
Dc.Jr !Vi~. Golden cHid M.t:. ?enn:

cdDcSR3ooe9etammal.hv~eaficlgdlf:ld,RaT.ai>BthiineiJnclrlL.duhltystsaaaw1~trltn:edynait.:cos..o;e~:!ct.dc·fReoec1Aft'-sL:eoitcclcLgre!a1ltedinas'slagooltnei~t,ei.mc~nnreeeDe1dnN9riLwea7urL~si3empttD,cohbhotieboanovreTrssrites0,1tci6taoyo7Eltncn~om0qo:,4:upo:2t-aml.8Dd~lhee,p0edte6,eErp)Cocmi:aFocclplrRsmeuntl,dsmonposydelTfPmaenMi1artenMLrnrtoStt.a.lyee[ 3OAcft2J9?ip:r.l,.:3ypte.so,aodc2n:r.~0CJctht1u.FbS:'e1CRsyen.4,,i

Inmn:.e cf :.he
Pur:
ty

Bec..tusc Lhe partLP.S resolutlon, my ofti ce l:as ~ompla~ :~t, 1.n accordance not.i fy1ng the parties o:

were unable
conpletcd i wit.h T1tle 2 the resul::s

co reach a n informal ts investiga:ion of th 8 CFR §39.170, and ~s t hrough this le tc.er .

e

:~Apbissvsleteerterdltiann.tlmdhBttstsioeeeooartd!lsyrMrrrO"y1laroas~ntn:.hlaefteteaenunaBuldc,rrs:trreoyeaaymq,:lrMla1me·.1~an.<u·!iihht.rL:1esliee:snd'vt3as~ai.ssnesarrrugyticicnant1ra"ohr!agogtnm.oeenraptnu.dsllJgno,:awouavfdissea1lob~saisgrlentrioerccgs1idwMi.nts:snn.siht.r:nga.ihe~gnAetaiS:desIrmoM rshtiyne~lrarngsae.himolcefrs3aa:rt. onirih.gydpeauhSr~ssaonTt,tirgvcnasntnieeadhcnvjoaess1dLtres.ara[tpetn:ho;Crg;.oa8lu:I:lemfhatotlfgocepf~~e:fpalieaurnrro1codr,(.nnLlt[\caioSBbh.vlLuu,lereLy)nryd.aLnOt's

•

A qua:1f:ed
effecc1vely

ASL interpreter to
with prisoo staff ,

he:p him communicate
edt:cational and vocational

Exhibit A, Page 43

00 / 00 / 201C3 as1e2 2: 1:191: -2c7v-f0A0X25241-3C2 A49S9-9D9T0B

• DocuNmATeInOtN8W9I-D1E LFEiGleAdL12/20/13 Page 22 of 28 #:1056

Page ID

47

instructors, work program managers and coordir.acors, medical staff, r.ealthcare providers, mental health professionals and pharmacists, and disciplinary o~E i cers;
e Non - aural, non-wrirten notificaLion of emergencies cr other importar.~ events ana announcements, e .g . a vibrating pager;
G Batteries for his hearing aids as needed;
Q Access to telecommunication d~vices approprjate fur d e af, such as videophone or TTY, equal to the telephone privileges of hear1~g inmates; and
" Safe access to a te :evision enabled wi t!! c ~ cse cap<.. iuni;,g, c o mmensurate with :he televisi o n privi : eges arro~ded to other inmates .
28 C.F.R . Section 39 . 130 provides the genera l prohibitio~s against discrimination. It states: "Nc qualified handicapped person shall ... be excluded from particlpation in, be den~ed the benefits of , or ocherwise be subjecced to discri~ination under any program or activity ~onducted by the agency . 11 28 CPR §39.130(a)
ln addit ion, it states that the agency , 1n providing any aid, benefit or service, may not . .. ( 1 ) Deny a qualified handicapped person the opport~nily Lo parLicipate in o r benefit from the aid, benefit or service; (~i) Afford a qualified handicapped person an opportunity to participate o r benefi t from the aid, benefit, or service that is not equal to that afforded ot~ers; (iii) Provide a ~ualifiec handicapped person with an aid, bene:ic, or service that is not as e:fective in affording equal opportunity to obtain the same result , tc gain the same benefit, or to reach the same level of achievement as that provided to others; (iv) Provide d ifferent or separate aid, becefits or services to ~andicapped persons or to any class of handicapped persons that is provided t o others unless such accion is necessary to provide qualified handicapped persons with aid, benefits, or services that are as effective as those prcvided to others ; ... (vi) Otherwise limit a quali:ied handicapped person in the enjoyment of any right, privilege , advantage , or opportunity enjoyed by ot~er r eceivi ng the aid, benefit , or service." 28 CFR §39 .130 (b) .
With regards to com11un i cations , the regulat.i.or:s state , "The agency shall take appropr iate steps to e nsure effective communication with . .. me~ers of the public .. (1) The agency shall furnish appropriate auxiliary aids where necessary to afford a handicapped person an equal opportunit y to participate in, and enjoy the benefits of, a program or activity conducted by tte agency. (i) In determining \vhat type of auxiliary aid is necessary , the agency shall give primary consideration to the requests of c~e handicapped person . (ii) The agency need not provide individually prescribed devices, readers for personal use or study, or other devices o! a personal nature. (2) Where the

Exhi bit A, Page 44

00/00/201C3ase122::1191:-c27v-0F0AX25241-C32A4S9-9D99T0B DocumtJAeTn10tN8W91-1DE FLiEleGdAL12/20/13 Page 23 of 28 Page ID #:1057

48

agency cornmun1cates wic~ .. b~;:~eflciarics by tel ep!1Cnt!,

Lelec effec

ommu t1vc

n1cation dev1ces telccornmunJcat:lo

(
n

o

r deaf
sy~;;tems

pe~sons
sholl

h

(TD~ 1 s)
e u~wd.

ot
11

equally

28 CF'R §39.160

docaBCri..ocefneeonefcmcmLc1de:a<:~pnusat:tlt1ssCMeictral~txs:.yrstiE. o,oci-(rnPfBl.1Cmarr.oraoCnhyvas)rdfiai3sensn/1igocTgt.pa,hrhunrro1c:moe.b\suosgJooeushroiunnclt·rtaut,t.:.mtdgrpv-rao.tarema-oe:yul:i.nnncn: oaegntlat.h:.nrl·:t·yqcerteusaarcenr!i:=ice-\~:·of·JJvi0ncuBOcle:a-esa::lto-vree:r-eeedt~•dhql"e Ira.:uJ:n.eLatieimshlervsyer.F:eJ:el~.ete:rCnf:d:;rs3L:ueesftarqrna1isaeuwnct<il€nm:iui!:lstntCahi'tcdttoosleyCnructsr.A,!:r.e11R-ceEn.h-tr'eTiA!iv;CLoh:iltheaensilvvaliaoseo1llntfi.e3"Lsh0

As ::tn: re;.,u:a::1ons :i!.:·cvc:- st!lte, auxJl l ct.::y aic J!J rH:!':'lit-:d 1.:0 prv v 1de M..-: cpporL U!1i Ly c ·::: partlc.:.pa;:.e in the: pro available a~ ?CC Tucson , Mr. nryant 's primary consid~rat~ml. Thus, ~ach of compl aint wil l bo= chscussorl , in o rder

:n dE:rer7'1:nln~ ·":~.1-::.
. E1yan t an e'~uc1l g rams a!"ld a c :..iv.1t 1es
requests w1ll be g 1 the requests lioted .

tYP'"' o f
ven in h1~

1 . A Qualified ASL Interpreter

davm~rvhencoeio~emdcc,cd;~a:la,ipncpbcnto~tfheuia'ermoia~l:!rvanra.m'nesrap:u!q!try.ln3:yaue.lirtaccfi"yaan:fia1-sn~,s;c:.2,dftfest8fr1h, ueece:eC.cdxcafsatrp.tfl:Fiordstervh.~1eerResqgcdstl.unlas,:y.1eirs,v§sveC•:,.et;eo~.:l!3:ianpyr.)y5cngklr,c.ugWci1r~~.pv!..0gruraatl4oaeshdr1gt.yqe.ernpirualogsnrrayf,nti,ls~aeionmmrf.!yainp.aeeCnrnndda~enstgrtetasc~a11c.l..\rfSm e:r:hs[s.,pa's,e:'asaaria.nnrerelyotdtdtihcn!ua'EresclcpgppolaLyr~weo!ucocnlr:Lofbl1odre.o:ae:i1si1ntlraohsisal:iz:1tooeoas-dnn-ra~dsnlb.elslep

The Rehabllitation Act :-equi~es ::hat ind1v1dua l s receive "mean1ngful acce:;;s 11 activlCles. Se(;• Rangolo:: v._ Ro<.lcers, 1'7 0

ot b.erwise qt.<\li:i<::r! to prograns Dnd F.3d 850 (8'" Cir'.

doasair:n9etretd5aqqtfi9euul(p.}v[anntarHldir.eoltstlmLiirfoc:iaeP.:a1.n1.inh:lpnd.stymeasJrodtIiae.ecS:utcLseacesl'a1"i~rtnvtra~i.ocotteaten.:mcrae1~dp~ln:erdeiienespatgtpcn~fe1ctiouurhpegl1.rli•aisae1ncrrs.ca1r!, cretf1:ry~mn:ausFsieisCpn~e.Crrfi"to:efs1~Tc1Tgeecwuh1enciutedLst,shnooi,ntngmtawhe,1teehohs~eyhengeamemot1evh1mtueehensturgctsratcMeecrhr.ycnbeou.se=~rpO.e~pra~oelytryaovo:t:v11rherdy1:endeerd

2. No t i ficati o n of Emerge nci es

o a

f

Mr. 3ryan
err.ergencies v1bratt :19 pa

t is requesting
or other :.mpo.r ger. CurrcnL:y,

no n tant
Mr

.

a:.Jral, events
3ryanL

:10 :1 ar.d
JS

-

wr ::. t•en !10':.::.fic-?.L.!on anr. oun~em<:! nts, e. :3 . ass1y n e d ~n !~nat~

Exhi bit A, Page 45

• 00/00/201C3ase122::1191:-2c7v-0FA0X25241-JC2A~S99-9D9T0B

• DocuNmAeTnl Ot N8v9ii-D1E FLEilGeAdL12/20/13 Page 24 of 28 #:1058

Page ID

49

companion, h~s cellmate, who 1s instr~cted to notify hi~ of emergencies a!1d other special mov<'>ments . Mr. !3::.-yan::'s cell l.S on Lhe !owest t1cr ~nd h~s bunk l.S on the lowe::.- bunk . Hls cell is across from a correctional of f icer's off1ce. He is :ocated in the same housing un1t as other specia~ care needs in~ates. A v1brati ng pager is not reliab!e due to the construction of the pri~on with 1ts steel doors and rebars.
l"hen dealing v:-:.t~l accomnodil: ions in the emp::.oymt:nt ccr~text, ::.he ..-ob Accommo(i<lLlon Net.\oJOlK, <~n f'!"gan_zullon refere::1c-ec.i by the Equal Employment Cpportu nity Comm1ssJ.~n. discusses tr.c ''buddy system" which is comparable Lo Jl.1r. 8::.-yant'!:> siLuat!.on . They state that thl? "buddy system should not be relied on as the only means of alerti~g on : nd1vidual with a hearing impairment to er:1ergency sicuaL tons. 11 They further explain tha:: ;:he use o~ :.he ''buddy syste~~~ can be approprtate bu:: only whe~ used in con) t.nct ion w ich another mec.:-tod. http : //ask]a_!l· oro/soar/
hear~nq/deaf.html.
Based on the constraints of che correctional environment , it is determined that the use of an inmate companion coupled with Lhe use of some !JOrL oE ·,,isuul alarm would be sufficient to mee:: Lhe regt.:latory requ1rements. Thus, FCC: Tucson must ensure that c!lere 1s :;ome socL o: visual alarn 1r.stallcd ::o aler:: tvtr. Bryan:: of emergencies .
3. Hearing Aid Current:y, ~ r. Erya~t does ~ot wear a heari~g aid. Upcn
complet~on ot <1n ex.:~nnr.a:ion by ur. aud1oJ osisL, 1 f it .:.s dec.ermtned that he reqt.:ires heari~g aids, then batLeries nus:: be provided. Mr. Bryur.t musL be provided a qual~!1cd tnLe~prP::er when meettng with medical sta~f.
4. Telecommunication Device Mr. Bryant 1s requesting access Lo Le " eco~nunlcat~on devices
appropriate for dea:, such as videophone cr T~Y. eq~al to the telephone pri~il egcs of :-tearing inmates. Mr . Bryant cur::.-ently has access to a 'l"fY phone system through unir. sta :f. At p::.-esent, Mr. Bryant must reques t a time to access the system t~rough the unit staf( . The TTY phone must be accessed through an 800 number. Because of security concerns , the phone must be maintained and accessed ::hrough a staff of(icc .
In ~~~~ock v. ~immons, 2000 WL 207162 (D.Kan 200 0), che court held chat the prison of=1cials did not discriminate against a deaf inMate in v1olation ot the Rehab1litat1on Act by permitting the deaf inma~e on ly l~miced telephone access in comparison tc the non deaf ir.moLes . The court found chat the deaf inma::e, whc wa s req·.1ired to use a special te:ecommun:.cations device for dectf 1n a separat e of:ice, had mean1ngful access to a
Exhibit/\, Page 46

• 0 0 / 0 0 / 2 0 1C3ase122: :1191:-2c7v-0FA0X25241-.C!A24S~-9D99T0B

DocuNmAeTnIOt N8W9I-D1E #:1059

FLiEleGdAL12/20/13

Page 25 of 28

Page ID

50

Lelepho n ~ . (See also Douglas v . Y1:!S~a.n, 567 F . Su[:p. 2d fJTI

(E . D. La. 2008}, Ei twice dnL:. y u3e of tler . ) 1~erefore , to TTY usage mee t:

nd1ng no discrlrninaL.io
TTY device outside o:
Mr. Brynnt ' s current the legal requirements

n when p r ison
deaf i:-ura te' Drrangcments .

provided s housing with rega

r

ds

5. Television Viewing

t-1 r . Brya:1c
close captionin
afforded to o:h one television c;apliorUllt2 Vlh~!l

requesLs S<'lfe g, corr.mensurat
er inrna ces. I i n M~. Bryant'
r>1r . Br ya:ll _s

acce~s to a tel evi sion enab ~ t.·d vl e 1r11t:h the televis:.on p::ivi::.t:ges t 18 hereby o rdered c~a :.. ~t .:.cast s hous1ng unit include close
1r/dldl.lns.J Lclevis~on .

ic

h

~EEeal Rights
Ahl~((ieBpedvuhta.Jtoiurreesindniaericguo9<pnno.l,toutt.::hfrlrTos9rb\un5t?p:eh0apr•r:1eOn:>sfPatofec2lonsin0tom2csn)em-sp5~2ylua8m1,ls11val1nCDya-abF0n:eeR1a3ip:.pa4at 5§rplLA~3e(mM l)9ave,l.ere1dnn. 7\Lut<.0JBeh:.!o,,{.cr1t:yfihsU)~eau.oJr.r:Wu:!:rt::.-)~s,;3nt.i.0do•ci1Wncedtnd:aagos,ys~ht!htCiJnetigooavtrf:ieotrl:se:rh.pqtR,e!o\:c..n!DC:geedcChslempttnpsl~t2f:aou0~Sfrn3t:a0tr:.ts Sincerely,

Mina Raskin EEO OEfi cer
c:c: Richard Toscano
Dln~ctor
Equal Ern:;>loymenL Op;>orcunity Staff J ustice Management Division Department of Jus t i~e

Exhibit A , Page 47

00/00/201C3ase122::\1fJ1:-2c7v-0FA0X25241-3C~A4S99-D99T0B DocuNmAeTnIOtN8W9I-D1E FLEilGeAdL12/20/13 Page 26 of 28 Page ID #:1060

51

EXHIBIT B

• 00/00/201C3ase122::1191:-2c7v-0FA0X25241-JC2A4S99-D~9T0B

DocumNAeTnIOtN8W9T-1DE FLiEleGd/\L12/20/13 #:1061

Page 27 of 28

Page ID

52

U01JTJ::() STATLS DEPAR IM ENT Of JUSTICE I·:XECUTIV.-: OFFIC'F FOR IMMIGR/\T ION REVIEW O~FICE OF Til E CJ li EF ADM INISTRATIVE II EA RJ NG OfFICER
June~O.~O J 3

D/\ VlD BRYANT.

)

Complainant ,

)

)

V.

)

)

FEDERAL 13UREAU OF PR ISONS.

)

_H_e_s p_o_m_k_n_t ______________________ ))

Case No . 06704-0 I6

RFCOMM FNOED DECIS ION WITH FfNDlNGS Or: FACT. CO~CI.USIONS 0~ L1\ \V, AND REMEDIES

1\ ppt:aranccs:
For the complainant:
MatthewS. ritzwatcr Andrew E. Ge lfand Adam T. Kirgis
For the n::spondcnt :
Thacsa T. Talplacido Eliczcr Ben-Shmuel

Adam M. Shapiro Deborah M. Gultkn Rory Price Culver

I.

PROCEDURA L IIISTORY

or This case arises under section 504 of tht: Rehabil itation Act 1973 as amendt:d, 29 U.S.C'. §
794, which provides in pertinen t part that,

No otherwise qualified individual with a disability in the United States ... shall, solely by reason of her or his disability, be excludt:d from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discriminat ion under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance or undt:r any program or activity conducted by any Executive agency or by thr.: United States Postal Service.

Exh ibit 8 , P~gc 48

• 00/00/201C3ase122::1191:-2c7v-0rJ0IX25241-JC?.A49S9-9D(JTOB

DocuNmA1e'n1OtN8W9I-D1E FLEilGeAdL12/20/13 #:1062

Page 28 of 28

Page ID

53

2
29 C.f.R. § 794(u). R<!gulutions promulgated by the Department of Justice 1 in implementing this section arc set forth at 28 C.F.R. part19, Enforcement ofNondiscrimination on the Busis of llandicap in Programs or Activi ties Conducted by the Dcpartm~.:nt of Justice, and arc applicable to programs and activities of the various subunits of' the Department of JustiL:c, including, inter alia. the Federal Bur~.:au of Pnsons (UOP). David l!ryant, an individual in the custody of the BOP and currently an inmate <It the United Swtes Pcuite!nliary (USP) Tucson ,~ initiatt:d this muttc.:r by filing a complaint that was found to b<.: be complete pursuant to § 39. 170(d) as of :Vlny 2, 20 I I. Richard I oscano, the Director of' lhe I: EO swll at the Justice \lanagcment Div1s1on. delegated the processing of 13ryant's complaint to Mina Raskin, an EEO officer for the HOP. BeL:ausc inform~! resolution pursuant to* 19. 170(g) was not achieved, Mina Raskm conductetl an investigation and issued a Letter of Fintlings on November 2, 20 II pursuant to § 19.170(h)
Tht: r.t:tter of Findings addressed each of the five issues rai~ed by David 13ryant' s complaint : I)
qualified ASL interpreters. 2) notification ol'emergencies. 3) hearing aids, 4) telecommunication devi<.:es. aml 5) telev ision viewing. Tht: kner directed fi rst that a qualif1ed ASL interprett:r must be provided for David 1:3ryant whenever he attends an educational program, meets with a health <.:an;: provider. or participati!S in a disciplinary procet:ding and that if USP Tucson rdies on staff or inmates for this pmpose, it must ensure that they receive the proper training to met.:t the regulatory defmition. Second, the letter found that David Bry<ml 's request for nonaural , 110I1WTillen notification of emergencies anJ other important events und unnolliiL:ements L:ould be met by the usc of an irunate companion coupled with some sort of visual alann. and that a vibrating pager would not be rt:liablc . l'hird, th~.: letter directed that if <U1 audiology e.xam showed that Duvid 13ryant required hearing aids, batteries must he provided to him ao; neeclt:d . T he letter also found with respect to telecommunieatious that David Bryant's access to the teletypewriter (lTY) phone system was suffi<.:ient to meet legal requirements for me:lningful aL:Ct:SS, and finally, it directt:d that at least one television set in David Bryant's housing unit had to include closed captioning.
1 The authority to implement ~cction 504 was initially vested in the Department of 1-kalth, Education and Welfare, and subsequently in the Department of!Iealth and lluman Services. On November 2, 1980, President Carter issut:J Executive Order No. 12,250, 3 C. f .R. 298 ( 1980), vesting authori ty in the Attorney General for the coordination and implementation of§ 504 in federally assisted programs and executive agencies. 2 USP fu cson, a high-security penitentiary, is one of three facil ities at the Federal Corrections Complex (FCC) located in Tucson, Arizona. The other components are a satell ite camp and a medium security federa l correctional institution. David Bryant is serving a life sentence.
Exhibit B. Page 49

00/00/201C3 as1e2 2: 1:191: -2c7v-F0A0X25241-~C2A4GS9-9D9T0B

DocuNmATeInOtN8vi9l-l2lE #:1063

• FLEilGeAd!.12/20/13 Page 1 of 30

Page ID

54

3 fmaitatDnicodfnhetfaddei:§evrr:ritciemnp3dostrg9hasmeB.etetm1imedrv7rryueeu0siasglnn(ntymuiit)aDclsualanatasstatonoovtittoderiibadnycderpseedlp.tdp3qhdlrruayFaiyoteniavttrsioinisittttdtteint,a'eodshcgwdnlearay.rhepoahheiapplfeedpeeeaapaauwrDelqpit:ainiupatclghvaei.laisnliiadel·ftoeTneisBedmsdrhtpirleoatyrthden/haBe\tsoenSeO,cptrLLvotPaseeongeiddtcncnrtiatvle:tdcutehriricsdeoponiennoofwsf.atin,:Fniltatneilthnplphroi,drapnttoitaihgtfng:nesiBagcrdlcarOastnomathuPialneossndcsn,oeLltDou.atos:rseo:fftifIcotuoeehoetgrnmrhmrchoe.et:otbchrfrtceagFhspltrepeairnn2qoerricducg,ifiiina2riefncalm0isigamcf,IatsiIiasaetoaerndapnnesdnaud/ctd\srhSosawuuLtaledtnnht:e dmascrpdBwsecaioeaeadrqkiirgenyttdunvthmencaeeioilrnocrtrseuwttoseetdis.essslraaiedpotpgooidhennprtafegcehssfedmteeeueadrddrftrleioelitsittttdniclhphhnoeiseeaabotnvu:tctynainfntctiUaltiithne,nuchJSdegari~teieaoPn1untlncBdsegcttlaeOlfos"tenaiuhmoPcrnndcaedofd.m/stigomovnaSaunrngimcrse:nndqoucwciuoienuaconannlseansgitswstalchetlitlahere,noaiteedttritcmhataeomeorfecneavinmshnsacri.gnangtdppfneooeplaiHindloteniaoic/adpdefngoilihieciacbrncocsegaagiahn.trntwliaeetomoeFlefinnlirteidaesihnatteonhametsstghfliehclbaoeaeyeointtdrm,lemdLiTcctDtealhyehTprotatcngaeYotsviendeescfirni.uaddaaocofclnlcfHicvfneifasecierFspdystiaaihteaseanrsienncnoiolmblcdtpnaaiiyunlahlpettispgoupeetvtypsnrlrfeencobetrnovahatpe.:tfiltsscrcsipaDpi;vilarsoelweaovttcnee,tvvihth,pbihiisideansdrlettanege:Bttpddai[trsnk,)hy,aegboavhnusnieettd ocrDfrt[eooine)uamamngdvhvtoeieiieiinmddddnngiidg.eRseRs,s;srr:lytytt"ohhhhaareDaeemndtatFep1wavraic3neriroh0dgcdtniPiluleiOtie'enesnssgrnidypsttdtshiaohssaneesaa,rtiftegLhtfcritooenoochr\notnenvt:tcsdtefiercsvitannuooestddrrfhprs,iwaFenrtttnoeighhnlttvashalldeityt.wdri;Utneei:kenv:gSgrateseetaPprerfbypedfTrefrei'lnfocusc3egapctS0cusr<bttPios.hia;eevOnetciepenqaseisusuicaimtasocsintlecpmouilofeitttimehmieiuodendinmnitmaedciosdtoneahdimtltmtotaytu:ueptrpioprlltoldihrneianesemnbtsNesfceeatraoeinstrclvteliwaUaelqroitmiStcuitnyohiPbnrnaaeeeoTptdrovtpuU2efbetco.nSteash2iloPtien.0hmngT1empa1uplaln;ciernm;ostmdhoviaeetnietdn.edOetddOthPe CcwAooilntlkhccelol§uynd,3di9Rin.tgiiIco7ohn0nas(rkdAp)ru(Re3gca)uey,sd,ateDh3nae,t va2tori0di1nth2Bge.rwyiWnaanssitttci,ntouaenntsivdsoeenCnsoeatdreflstathCitifosyUuipSnnrgProicgfToehuretcd.tshionTenghcecohomagmvopevmlaebeirennneacmnninetsangitntio'cssnfluiwJedudietl.ndyeID3sns1eae,ncs2ncw0io~s1:r:2dreaanncde QSFoc-Uox,n, a7Pn.,edn/\LnAii-no8gnBetolIn3C.,rAaainrgadcAcIllpllkiaeCnrd.orRAonedsamp, oiDtntaedmdenointn'tsoMEecxvLhiodibeuingtcshel1inw-1.e0Sr.eteCveonmHplealilnmaannt,'sEEilxeheinbiBtsakt\e-rF, ,Ju1c1-kK, aewaOnxsendcarlNeutFhsonieinovvaateelummltyEhbexwonehrtrisiitbo2hain0ntme,ddL2air0tosteet1rcr2tioso,pfgsitfehoeenatrmhetisedeorictadlcwtleurniterththtr:ieefmiidhteseodaannfritteneihwnrstghtp,ahefretmtoheheprayeortasthwr:eeidnenhrogeeet.xanahTrvoii<hnbt~egiiatly,usattbahhIlrtIoe:e.r8fnio1zo02retP,dca<rmutosoutsdhsbbe1meen3xtit.iatitclmeTeaddtihen,ewdaasthneoiadoretnxstw.hwheaiToybsrhindstestetyaoll.ed
Exhibit B. Page 50

• 00/00/;01C3 as1e2 2: 1:191: -2c7v-F0A0X25241-3C24A9S'1-9D9T0B

• DocuNmATeInOtN8ltJ9I-D2E LFEilGeAdL12/20/13 Page 2 of 30 #:1064

Page ID

~5

tenckred exhibits 11 , I2, and I1 arc not admitted into evidence in this maller and any n:lhcnccs made to them in the rt.:spondent's proposed findings and conclusions art.: disregarded. This recommended decision is based exclusivdy o n the record made at the hearing. Many of the operative facts undcrlying this case an.: tmcontrovc rtl~d. In the cours~.: of the prchearing p rocedures the parties entered into thiny-fi ve tactual s ti pulations that address David Bryant 's abilities and limitations, the history of his designations at various BOP facilities, and some of the effi)rts USP Tucson made to accommociCite his disabi lity alier his arrival then;: on July 14, 20 1I . Those stipulations were deemed acccptcd as binding o n the parties without the necessity of ll•nher proof. and nrc udopted as the first thiny-livc findings of fact infra; the a dditional fi ndings an: made based on the testimony of the witnesses and the exhibits admitted at the hearing.

I I.

SUMMA RY OF HEAJ{I~G

The evidence shows that David Bryan t '~ language is American S ign Language (ASL), a visual language not related to spoken ur signed English. It is und isputed that David Bryant is unable tu hear or understand spoken words. with o r without heari ng aids, and that the extent of his maste ry o f wrillcn English has thu~ far remained at the lt:vcf o f the very earl y primary g rades. Jh: is nevertheless able to manage the ordinary activities of everyday living at USP Tucson such as ordering items in th e commissary and following the basic schedule for mealtimes or other activities, so long as the interactions an.: sufficien tl y simple and can be understood through gesturing or wrtting basic English words on a whi teboard. Lipreading, fingcrspeffing, and signed Engl ish' arc fo r the most part tools of limited uti!ity for Da vid Bryant beca u ~c their e ffecti veness depends upon the user's COillpetence in the English language. David Bryant is also able to some degrct: to utilize T rul .i ncs, a computer system cksigncd fo r inmates that permits them to access their commissary accounts, to receive menus and o ther in te rnal notices, and to send and receive email to and from approved contacts. David Bryant is able to contact his attorneys by e mail us ing Trul.incs but because his famil y has no computer or internet access he is unable to usc the TruLincs system to communicate with them.
A. Jntcrpretcr Services

During the period betw~.:en the issuance of the Letter o f f' indings and the hearing, David Bl)·ant had no disciplinary proceedings or issues. but he did have numerous medical encounters and also attended educational programs. It was undisputed that on numerous occasions when Bryant had medical encounters or e nrolled in educmional programs, a qualified ASL inte rpre ter was not provided for him. There were in fact o nly three occasions between the Letter of Findings and the

3 Signed English is a form of English in which each spoken wo rd is accorded a corresponding manual sign, and the signs are used to convey the words.

Exhibit 8. Page 51

00/00/2013Cas1e2 2: 1:1q 1: 2-c7v-F0A0X252143-2C·1A'JS9-9D9T0 B

DocuNmATeInOtN8t"H9D-2E #:1065

LFEiGleAdL 12/20/13

Page 3 of 30

Page ID

56

5
the date of the hearing when qualified interpreters were provided. These occurred first on July 21 , 20 II when David Bryant went through the Admissions and Orientatio n process (A&O) upo n his arrival at USP Tu<.:son; second, in Dcccmbcr of2011 for the st:cond of two appointments with an audiologist: and third, during the summer of 2012 for a suicide prevention program. ·n ,ere were ttl least twt:nty occasions when David Bryant had mcdic<~l appointments or encounters at whi<.:h no qualilieu ASL interprt:ter was provitkd. No J\SL interpn:ter was provitkd for a ny of the educational programs David Bryant attended, although USP Tucson m:knowlcdged the need to increase his reading comprehension level. The p rison's lndividunl Pl;ul of Accommodations for David 11ryant reOects that testing indicated his reading skill s were at the hig h first g rade;: lt:vel and that the spe~.:itic goal set o ut in the plan is to increase his reading comprehension. The areas of need set out in the Plan induded comprehension, context cl ues, details/facts, main idea, drawing conclusions, inference/predicting o utcome, and summarizing. ro the extent then:: was confl ict in the expert tcsttmony regarding the necessity of ASL inteq1retcrs for educatio nal progrnms, I fo und the testimony of Professor Cokely more rersuasive as well as more consistent \Vith David 13rymlt's own experience and therefore credit that. because of his reduced reading and wri ting skills, David Aryan! would require an ASL inte rpreter for most educational programs if the program is to s ucceed. The exception to this general rule would be for computer-t.lirectcd coursc:s that do not requin: interaction with others. Although Ei leen Ba ker, o ne of IJSP Tucson's expert witnesses, disagreed in some respects with Professor Cokcly's a ssessment, she too emphasized the necessity of improving n:ading and \-Vriting skills as part of an educational program for the deaf. USP Tucson itself has a direct interest in increasing David Bryant's abi lity to unde rstand written Engl i ~ h because as he becomes bcner able to communicate in writing, his need for ASL interpreter services is likely to diminish. Al though inmall:s or stuff assisted at some of David Bryant's med ical appointm<.:nts, USP Tucson acknowledged that those individuals were not qualified interpreters, and they are not. As explained in the Letter of Findings. a qualified interpreter pursuant to 28 C.f. R. § 35. 104 is one who is "able to interpret cffectivdy, accurately, and impartially both receptively and expressively, using any necessary specialized vocabulary." Given their inherent conflicts of interest, neither staff nor inmates can bt: characterized as impartial, even with training, and confidentiality concerns will always be an issue as well. Cf Bonner v. Lewis, S57 r.2d 559. 563 (9th Cir. 1988) (plaintiff asserted that inmate interpreter leaked nature of his crime to general prison popula tion thereby endangering plaintiffs safety). There are certain contexts in which the use of inmates and staff as interpreters simply pose unacceptable risks, for example, at disci pl inary pro~:eedi n g!>, at medical appointments, or in other high stakes s ituations. Cf 28 C.F. R. § 115. 16(c) (prohibiting, except in limited circumstanccs, the usc of inmate interprt:tcrs in programs desig ned to prevent sexual abuse and sexual harassment).
Exhib it B, Page 52

00/00/ 01C3 as1e2 2: 1:191: 2-c7v-F0A0X25241-3C24A9S9-9D9T0 B

• DocuNmATeIn#Ot:N18W09i6D-26E LFI:i:lGeAdI.12/20/13 Page 4 of 30

Page ID

57

6 Federal anti-discrimination regulations do not require that an ASL interpreter b~.: formally cer1ificd by tht:: Nntional Registry of lntt:rprelers for the Dear(RJ D) in ordl.!r to be deemed qualitied. See Duffy v. Rive/and, 98 F.3d 447,455-46 (9th Cir. 1996) (declining to find that regulations enacted pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act require RID certification). RID certification is nevertheless probably the easiest way to ensure lhat an interpreter is qualified. The standard set out rnthc Court Interpreters Act of 1978,28 U.S.C. §§ 1827-1828 (200G) providt:s in pertinent part that the presiding offict:r in judicial proceedings instituted by the Uni ted States "shall utili.t:e thc services oftht: most available eertilkd interpreH.:r. or when no certified interpreter is rea.:;onably available . .. the services of an otherwise qualified interpreter." This is the standard to be used in selecti ng interpre ters. For purposes of determining whether an interprt:ter is "othen.vise qualirrcd,'" the qualifications must be evaluated using an objective standard. Jack r:ox , Chicf of Security to the Office of Security rt:chnology for the BOP, and Craig Apker, the Warden for FCC 1 ucson, testified that a DSL line was being installed in three locutions at USP Tucson. in the associate warden's conference room, in the medical unit and in the cducational unit, and that US!> Tucson would unde11akc the process of contracting for video remote interpreter (VRI) sen.·iccs to enable it to provide ASL interpreters for David Bryant in order to comply with the Letter of Findings.
13. Noti lication of Emergencies The Lerter of f-indings noted that a cell mate and inmate companion had been assigned to D;lVid Bryant and that one of the companion's responsibilities was to notify David Bry:mt of emergencies and other special movements. The letter found this to be insufficient and directed that assignment of an inmate companion must be supplcmcntcd with "some sort of visual alarm" to alert Duvid Bryunt to emergencies. USP Tucson therea t!cr added rwo additional types of visual emergency notification signals to the already existing visual fire alarm. A blue rotating light was installed around Janunry 19, 2012 outside David Bryant's cell ill the housing unit, and the so-called amber light (also referred to as the ydlow or o range light) was installed on each side of the tower in the recreation yard on or about June 15, 2012. Testimony by officials was that the blue light signals a lockdown, calling for inmate::s to retum to their cel ls, and that the amber light means that inmates out in the yard need to gel down on the ground- a standard occurrence in high security institutions. There was no concrete evidence, however, that either of these lights had actually ever been used or that David Bryant was ever specifically educated as to what each meant and what he wus to do in response. While Scott Pennington, unit manager, testified that he believed a staff member would have instructed David Rryant what to do if the blue light came on, David Bryant's testimony was that no one ever told him what to do when the blue light flashes. David Bryant's understanding of what he is supposed to do, moreover, appears to be the exact opposite of what was intended for the blue light: he testified that "If it ever does !lash, then I know that l have to go out.'" He said,
Exhibit B, Page 53

00/00/2013Cas1e2 :21:191: 2-"c/v-F0A0X252143-2CiJA(!SSJy-<D)QTB DocuNmI\TeInOtN8W9I -D2E: LFEiGleAdL 12/20/13 Page 5 of 30 Page ID

58

#:1067

7
said, '·I assume that when it fl ashes. I lcavt!." lie also said, howevl.!r, that he woultl be wondering where he was supposed to go. Whi le efforts may have.: been made to convey information to David Bryant about the menning of the lights, the questionable effectiveness of such efforts appears to be part of a generali:t.cd pattern of misunderstandings and miscommunications. ·1here was testimony by others that Davitl Bryant knew what to do in response to c.:aeh of the emergency signals, but this appears to be an unwarrantt!d assumption. l'\otwithstanding assurances by prison officials that 13ry<mt understands what is conveyed to him by lipreading, gesturing, reatl ing, and writing, moreover. it is tliffiwlt to credit that a person whose mastery of written English has not rcacht:dthc second grade level is capable ofm ueh effccti ve communication by those means. Despite the testimony of prison officials that David Bryant knows what to do in response to each of the emergency signals,· I cannot conclude that he dot!s .
T hen; were, moreove::r, some troubling inconsistencies in the testimony with respect to the new signals. Jack Fox tcstiticd that the blue light signals an ins titutionallockdown , and Carl Courtright said that fur a lockdov\-TI within the unit itsdf, the only alarm would be a verbal one from the statT. Courtright described a specific incident a few days before the hearing when staff had to locute an inmate:: and a verbal lockdown was callc.:d without turning on the blue light. He said that although the other inmates were running around preparing for the lockdovm, David Bryant was j ust st<mding there watching the clost:d captions on the television until Courtright went to get him. 'Nl1en Wnrden 1\pkcr was questioned about this incident he:: said that he was unaware or that particular lockdown, but gcnt:rally speaking the blue light should have been turned on. The recortlthus lacks clarity as to whether the blue light is turned on only for an institutional lockdown or whether it is supposed to be turned on for a unit lockdown as well.
While I concur with the Letter of Findings that the use of an inm<~te companion coupled with visual alarms may under appropriate ci rcumstances be enough to satisty the requirements of the Rehabilitation Act, these requirements arc not satisfied by the;: provision of warning lights the meaning of which is not made crystal clear to nonhearing individuals. Warning lights also fai I to meet regulatory requirements if they arc not actually activated when appropriate. The risk of consequences fo r fai lure to follow directions in a high security setting is serious; Warden Apker said that a wrong response cou ld have consequt:nces to David Bryant's physical safety or that of others, including tht: ability of staff to resolve an emergency situation.
David Bryant requested a vibrati ng pager for notification of emergencies, and pointed out th at regulations provide that in dctem1ining what type of auxiliary aid is necessary, the agency shall give primary consideration to the requests or the handicapped individual. 28 C.F.R. § 39.160(a)(l )(i). The same regulations also note, however, that an agency "need not provide individually prescribed devices, readers for personal usc or study, or other devices of a personal nature." 28 C. F.R. § 39.160(a)( l )(ii). Scott Pennington testified that inmates arc not permitted to have individually owned cell phones, laptops, personal DVD players, or other ckclronic.; devices. One.: of Bryant' s own witnesses, Richard Ray, testified that a vibrating pager is not appropriate within a high sec urity correctional institution.
Exhi bi t B, Page 54

00/00/2013Cas1e2 :21:911: 2-7cv-F0A0X25214-jC24ACSJ9-9D9T0 B

• DocuNmATelnOtN8W9I D-2E LFEiGleAdL 12/20/13 Page 6 of 30 #:1068

Page ID

59

8
The Lettc.:r or Findings said that a vibrating pager would not be reliable due to the construction or the prison with its stt:cl doors and n:bars. The evidence with respect to this point was equivocal und no findings are based on it. 13ut even giving primary consideration to his request for a
vibrating pager, the not> is not obligated under the Rehabilitation Act to provide David Aryant
with this or other personal devices. It is required, however, to ensure that adequate notice is provided to him or emergencies and such notice includes the necessity or being provided wi th specific instruc tions as to what is expected o l· him.
Detailed information about the nature of the emergency, however, is not immc.:diately provided to other inmates and need not be provided to David 13ryant ei ther. although cxplanutions may be provided after the fact. Oeneral nonemergency t:lc·~tronic announcements at lJSP Tucson are made to inmaws via IruLincs, but becuuse inmatc.:s do not have access to ·1ruLincs during emergencies. this sy•acm is not a vehicle through \vhich emergency notifications can be made. Additional information may be provided about an emergency in this manner, however. once the emergency i<> over.
Fi re alarms in the Tucson lilei lity consist of a loud noise :md fl ashing white strohe lights that unambiguously have only one meaning: evacuate the area. There were no issues raised wi th respect to the lire alarm ami David Bryant knows what to do in response to it
c. relecorrunumcattons
13ecause David Bryant is deaf and cannot speak, he is unabk to use the regular inmate telephone system. USP Tucsun pruvides ITY services as an alternative. A TTY consists of a display, a keyboard like that on a typC\>.'ritcr, and a receiver for a telephone handset. 'rfYs al low a deaf person to communicate by sending a lypcwrittcn message either to another TTY user din.:dly. or to a non-TTY user ind irectly by using a TelecommuniciJ tion Relay Service erRS), in which Ca<;e the relay service operator rc.:cc.:ives the rypewri ttcn message, then reads it aloud over the phone to the hearing recipicnt. The relay opcrator then transcribes the recipient's verbal response and types it to the nonhcaring pc.:rson via 1TY.
David Bryant said he uses the relay service to communicate with his family because they do not have a computer or a ITY device. But David Bryant complains that he is not bt:ing provided equal access to telecommunication because his TTY access is limited by staff availability; the ITY service is never available to him in the everting or on weekends as telephone service is to hearing inmates. Hearing inmates have access to te lephone services .seven days a week. David Bryant testifi ed tirat the.: reason he cannot usc the TrY on the weekend is that the counselor is not there. David Bryant's family members are not at home during the week, however, because they
arc at work. David Bryant also contends that rrv is not in any event an effective means of
communication for him and requests a videophone. 1\. videophone is a camera that uses special video compression rates and is connected by the internet to a videophone at the other end to permit communication between two people by signing.
Ex hi bit B, Page 55

00/00/2013Cas1e2 :21:911: 2-7cv-fA0X0252143-C24A9S9~-D90TB

• DocuNmATeInO#tN:18W09I6O-29E LFEiGleAdL 12/20/13 Page 7 of 30

Page ID

60

9
Based on expert witness testimony, TTY ic; rupidly becoming obc;olete in the civi lian workl.
While primary consideration must be given to David 11ryant's expressed request tor a
videophone, that technology is inconsistent with the testimony David Bryant gave at the hearing that hodoes not communi cate with fam ily members in ASL and that even before his incarceration his family often Jidn'tumlt:rstaml him \-\hen he used ASL. lie suid he had to write in order to communicate with them, and that his sister understood his writing better and often had to help the others bccl:IUSc hi s English is quite limitcd . II' his litmily mcrnbers do not undcrstnnd J\SL, it docs not appcar that a videophom: would facilitate communication with them. Video Rclay Service, on the other hand , would appear to be a superior method in all respects for David Uryant to com muni cntt: with his family. VRS is a fo rm o r I dccommunication Relay Service Cf RS) that enables 1\Sl. users to communicute with voice telephone users through video rather than typed tt.::<l. 1 The video relay operator Sl·es the ASL signs madc by the nonhearing pason by computt:r or vidt:ophon~. tht:n translates the,; message to English and speaks it on the ph one to the non-1\SL user. l'hc spoken response can then be translated hack to the nonhcuring person in 1\SL. Un like the tTY system. no typ ing or text is involvt.:d. VKS uses the same technology as is used lor video remote interpretation, a capacity that by now should be up and mnning at US P Tucson. VRS has a number of addiuonal advantages because it facilitatec; conununication bt:tween a ust.:r of ASL and a nonuser in a much more effi cien t way than 'ITY . S~curity conct::rns arc satisfi ed because the only number that m:l.!ds to be called is the number for the VRS servict:, and tht: prison has the abili ty to restrict the telephone numbers that may be contacted by the service just as it does with the cunent 1-ry relay system. Section 19.160(a)(2) requires that telecommunication devices for deaf persons must be provided, but docs not mandate that the auxiliary aids be the most technologically advanced or that state-of-the-art technology be obtained . ITY access has, moreover, gent::rally bt:cn found to satisfy the miJ1imum requirements of the Rt:hnbilitation Act, see. e.J.:.. Dou~:los \1. Gusman, 567 F. Supp. 2d 877, 887 (E. D. La. 2008); Spurlock v. Simmons, 88 F. Supp. 2d 1189, 1196 (D. Kan. 2000); t.:f Chisolm v. AkManimon, 275 F.3d 315, 329 (3d Cir. 200 I), so long as meaningful access is provided . No cases have been cited to me in which VRS has been mandated in a prison setting. I therefore must concur with the Letter of Findings that TTY access can be sufficient to comply with legal requirements, but this is the case only under certain conditions. Regulations require that appropriate auxiliary aids must be furnished to afford a handic<tpped person an e4ual opportunity to participate in and enjoy the benefi ts of programs and activities. 2R C.I-'.R. § 39.106. This docs not necessarily mean that access to telecommunications services for a qualified handicapped individual must be precisely equal to that available to others, but it docs ~ VRS providers are compensated through the Interstate T RS fu nd overseen by FCC. See Consumer Guide: Video Relay Services, Federal Communications Commission (Jru1. 13, 2012), http://transi tion,fcc,gov/cgh/consumerfactsl videorclay.pel f.
Exhibit 13 , Page 56

00/00/2013Cas1e2 :21:191: 2-c7v-F0A0X252143-2C,JASJS<J-9D9T0 B

• DocuNmATeInOtN8W9ID-2E LFEiGleAdL 12/20/13 Page 8 of 30 #:1070

Page ID

61

10
mean that access must be meaningful. Set' Douglas v Gusman. 567 f . Supp. 2d at 887 (access to to TrY fift een or twenty times between May and September, then ont: call in the evening seven days a week for about six wecks was meaningfu l access). Given the totality of the c ircumstances, David Bryant 's act:ess to tclccommuniccllions servit:t!s is not meaningful or comparable to that of othcr inmiltcs when ht.! is continually deprived of uccess in the evenings and on weekends.
Ill. FINDIN( iS OF FACT 1\ND CONCLUS IONS OF LA \V
A. Findings of Fact
I. The complainant in this action is David f3ryant , Register Number 06704-0 16. Mr. Hryant is a deaf man. 47 years of age, and currently incarcerated at United States Penitentiary ("USJ>") Tucson, in fucson, Arizona.
2. !'he respontknt in this action is the Federa l Bureau of Prisons ("BOP"). The HOP is an organizational unit of the !)cpnrtmc:m of Justice. The l30Jl is the federal agency responsible for the supervision and custody of approximately 2 17. 152 inmates, including Mr. Bryrult. The BOP is headquartered in Wa:shington, D.C.
1. Mr Oryant is current ly servinf! a li fe sen tence. Mr. 11ryant was placed in BOP custody on November 3, 2003 and transfern.:d lO USP Tucson, when.: he is currently incarcerated, on July 14, 20 I I. Before heing transferred to US P l'ucson, Mr. Bryan t was housed successively at the following institutions: US P ll azleton, USP Coleman. US P Victorville, and USP Canaan.
4. Mr. Bryant is hearing impaired and only able to hear very loud noises with the assistance of a hcnring aid ; he cnnnot hear and understand human speech with or without a hearing uid . Mr. Oryant's hearing impairment dates to early childhood .
5. Mr. Oryant uses American Sign Language ("ASL"), spoken and writtt.!n English and lip reading in an allempt to communicate wi th staff and other inmates in BOP.
6. Mr. Bryant infonned Respondents of, and requested various accommodations in connection with, his deafness by using the BOP's administrati ve remedy process.
7. Specifically, Mr. Bryant requested through the BOP administrative remedy process, among other things: (a) a qualified AS L interpreter to help him communicate with various prison staff~ including heulthcare providers and educational and vocational instructors; (b) non-aural, nonwrinen notificution of emergencies and other prison aJarms and important announcements, e.g., via vibrat ing pager; (c) acct!SS to a telecommunication device appropriate for the deaf, such as a teletypewriter (" I' I'Y") or videophone; (d) safe access to a television enabled with closedcaptioning and (c) working hearing aids and hearing aid balteries on an as-needed basis.
Exhibit 13, Page 57

00/00/2013Cas1e2 :21:19 1: 2-c7v-F0A0X252143-2C·A1~S9-9D90TB DocuNmATeInOtN8W9ID-2E LFEiGleAdL 12/20/13 Page 9 of 30 Page ID #:1071

62

II
~. On January 7. 20 I J. Mr. Hryunt fi led a complaint in the United States District Court to r the Central District of California. naming as defendants the BOP and various BOP employees in their oflicial capacittc'> (the ''FedcraJ Complaint"). The Federal Complaint asserted claims for re lief under the U.S. Constituti on and the Federal Rehabilitation Act (" Rehabilitation Act"), 29 U.S.C. § 794 et seer and 5 U.S.C. § 703. 9. On Jul y II. 20 1J, Mr. Bryant's Reha bilitation Act claim was dismissed without prej udice by JuJgc Christina A. Snyder on the ground that in order to comply with the Prisoner Li tigation Reform Act. 42 U.S.C . § 1997e, Mr. Aryant must first exhaust not only the AOP's Administrative Remedy Program, 2H CY.R. § 5~2. 1 0 et setJ., but also the administrative process laid out in the Enfo rcement of Nond iscrim ination on the Basis of llandicap in Programs or Activities Conducted by the Department of Justice Compliance Procedures, 2H C.F.R. § 39,170. Judge Snyder stayed Mr. Oryant's remaining claims pending the outcome of the administrative process. I0. The BOP's Equal Employment Opportunity ("EEO") Office investigated Mr. Bryant's complaint. dctem1ined to be complete as of May 2, 20 II . I I. On November 2, 20 II, Ef:O Oftic.:er Mi na Raskin iss ued a Leller of Findi ngs in response to Mr. Bryant's May 2. 201 1 administrative complaint. which is the subject ofthc instant nppcal. 12. Mr. Orynnt c..:nnnot usc the telephone in the same way as a hearing person. anJ requires either a Tf'Y or a videophone to conm1unicate. 13. 'lTYs allow deaf ind ividuals to communicate in English via typewritten means either directly with another TTY user or indirectly with a non-'ITY user via a Telecommunications Relay Service ("TRS"), in which the relay operator reads aloud the wrillen messages from the TTY user and transcribes the non-TTY user's verbal response. 14 . A videophone is a telephone "vith a camera and screen for visual. real-time communication. 15. The BOP has had an "IP Video Network" which is utilized for. among other things, conducting video conferences in medicine and psychiatry. 16. Closed captioning is the process of displaying on a television a transcription of the audio portion of the broadcast, including spoken and non-spoken aural clements. On televisions capnble of displaying closed captioning, the feature can be enabled with the use of a remote control or program menu. 17. Mr. Bryant was designated at USP llazelton in Oruceton Mills, West Virginia from August 03, 2005 to October 06, 2009.
Exhibit B, Page 58

• 00/00/201C3 as1e22: :1191:-2c7v-r0A0X25241-3C2A~9S9-9D9T0B

DocuNmAeTInOtN8W9I-D2E FLEilGeAdL12/20/13 #:1072

Page 10 of 30

Page ID

63

12
I8. Bryant was designated <ll USP Coleman 1 in Coleman, Florida from October I3, 2009 to March I 6. 20 I 0.
19. Uryant was designated at USP Victorville in Adelanto. Culifomia from March 18,20 10 until March 3 I, 201 I .
20. !Jryant was temporarily held at MDC Brooklyn in 8rooklyn, Nl!w York. from April 04.:2011 to May 04.20 1I.
21 . 13ryant \\:lS designated at USP Canaan in Waymart. Pennsylvania. from ~'lay 04. 2011 to July 07.2011
22. Uryant ha!> been inc:m.:eratcJ at USP Tucson on July I4. 20 II .
23. new has used staff' members and inmates with some knowledge of ASL to communicate with Mr. Bryant in the provision of medical care , educational programming. and direction regarding the expectations of stuff.
24. US P Tucson provid<.:t.l Mr. Bryant ASL intt:rpreters during certain portions of the prison's inmate orientation programs.
25. At various times. USP rucson has allowed staff members and inmates to interpret for Mr. Bryant. /\either the stall' mcmberc; nor imnatcs arc certified ASL interpreters.
26. On or around November 07, 2011, Mr. nryant was examined by an audiologist. USP Tucson did not provide Mr. 13ryunt with an ASL interpreter.
27. Mr . Bryant recei vt:d a new hearing ait.l for his left car on Decernbcr JO. 20 II to better enable him to hear loud noises that might indicate an emergency situation. As of the date of this document, \lfr. Bryunt now receives new hearing aid ballerics by cxchunging tht!m one for one on as needed basis. 1\n ASL interpreter was present during the December 20 II hearing aid fitting and appointment with thc audiologist.
n. On or around November 14. 20 II , Mr. 13ryant ant.! Carl Courtright began sharing a cell.
29. Since being transferred to USP Tucson, Mr. 13ryant attempted to access televisions with closed-captioning.
30. On January 19, 2012, USP Tucson insta ll cJ several new televisions with closed-captioning. The closed-captioning on these televisions cannot be disabled by the inmates.

Exhibit 13, Page 59

00/00/201C3ase122::1191:-2c7v-0FA0X25241-3C2A4S99-D99T0B DocuNmAeTnIOt N8W9I-D2E FLEilGeAdL12/20/13 Page 11 of 30 Page ID #:1073

64

13
3 1. At USP Tucson. Mr. Bryant hns access to a television with closed-c•lptioning in English at the housing unit , eduention nnd recreation areas. 32. ROP has taken certai n steps to provide noti lication of emergencies to Mr. Bryant. These include providing an inmate companion who is also his cei!Jnate, and on or around January 19, 2012. L'SP ruesun installt:J a !>trobe light in Mr. Bryant's unit for notification or emergencies. HOP also installed a hearing impaired sign on his cell door. 13 \\.-'hilc at l 'SP Tucson, Mr. Bryant also sought access to communication systems. USP l'ucson has a 'ITY. 34. At USP Tucson, Mr. Uryant has access to soda! t1nd legal mail , social and legal visits, and inmate ~::mail (TruLincs). 3S. While at L1SP Tucson, Mr. Bryant has sought access to educational programs. 36. A blue flashing light was installed outside D:Jvid Bryant's cell in the housing unit on or aboutJanuary 19,2012. 37. Prison officials testified that the blue light signifies a lockdown, meaning thnt prisoners arc to return to their cc:: lis. 38 . Amber flashing lights were installed on each side of the tower in the recreation yard on or uboutJune 15.20 12. 39. Prison officials testified that the amber light means that inmates arc to get on the ground. 40. It does not affirmatively <.!ppear that David Bryant has been providcJ adeyuate instructions as to the significance of the new emergency lights and precisely what he is to do in response to each. 41 . On at least twenty occa<>ions during the period between the Letter of Findings and the hearing in th1s matter, yualifietl 1\SL interpreters "vere not provided to David Bryant for medical appointments or encounters. 42 . Qtlali1icd ASL interpreters were not provided to David Bryant for any of thr.:: educational programs he attended during the period between the Letter of Findings and the hearing in this muller.

Exhibit B. Page 60

• 00/00/201C3as1e22: :1191:-2c7v-0FI0\Z25241-3C2A1,S99-D99T0B

DocuNmAeTnIOtN8W9I-D2E FLEilGeAdL12/20/13 #:1074

Page 12 of 30

Page ID

65

14
43. Lkcausc of David llryant' s low level of reading and writing ski Its. he requires a qualified
1\SL interpn:ter fo r most ctlm:utional programs if thl: program is to succeed. ·r he only
educational programs lor which a qualified 1\SL interpreter is not requ ired arc computer-directed courses that do not n:quire interuction with othcrs. Whenever an educationul program involves intcractivity whether one-to-one, small group, or lecture- a qualitied 1\SL interpreter is re4uircd. 44. Ouring the summer ol20 12 US I' Tucson began the process of installing a DSL line 1n three locations: the associatt: warJe11 's office, thc meJic<~l unit. nnd the educational unit. for the purpose of facil itating the provision of video remote interpretation services to David Bryant. 45. Itearing inmates at USP Tucson have access to telephone services seven days a week. 46. David Oryant docs not have meaningful access to telephone services on weekends or in the evening. 47. David Bryant's family members arc usually at work on wcckJays. 48 . Video Relay Sen icc is a form of Telecommunication Rda} Service that enables t\SL users to commun icate with voice telt:phom: users through video rather than typed text. 49 VRS usc·s the same technology as is used for video remote interpretation. 50. 'ITY is rapidly becoming an obsolet e; technol ogy.
B. ConclusiOns of Law
I. [)avid 13ry<u11 is a qualified handicapped person within the meaning of21l C.F.R. § 39.103. 2. The l'ederal Bureau of Prisons, together with its components, is an agency within the meaning
of28 C.F.R. § 39.103. 3. /\II conditions precedent to the institution of this proceedi ng have been satisfied. 4. A 4ualilied interpreter pursuant to 28 C.F. R. § 35. 104 is one who is "able to interpret effectively, a~:curatcly, and impartially both receptively and cxpressivl:ly, using any necessary specialized vocnbulary.., 5. There an; certain contexts in which the use of inmates and staff a<> interpreters simply pose unacceptable risks, for example, at disciplinary proceedings, at medical appointments, or in other high stakt:s situat ions. ('j 28 C.f-.R. § I 15. 16(c); Bunner v Le'Wis. 857 F.2d 559, 563 (9th Cir.
1~88).
Exhibit 8 , Page 61

00/00/201CJase122::1191:-2c7v-0FA0X25241-3C2A4S99-D99T0B

• DocuNmAeTnIOt N8W9-ID2E FLiEleGdAL12/20/13 Page 13 of 30 #:1075

Page ID

66

15
6. Feuc:ral anti-discrimination rcgulations do not require that an 1\SL interpreter be formally certified by the National Regi stry oflntcrpreters lo r the Dcnf(RID) in order to be deemed
qualifictl. See /)u./)j• v Rive/and, 98 F.3d 447,455-46 (9th Cir. 1996). 7. rhc standard set out in the Court Interpreters 1\ct of 1978.28 U.S.C . §§ 1827-1828 (2006)
pro\'ides in pertinent part that the presiding officer in judicial prm:eedings instituted by the United States ..shnll utilize the services of the most available certified interpreter. or when no certified in terpreter is reasonably available ... the services of an otherwise qualified interpreter." 8. The use of an inmate compan io n coupled with visual alarms may unde r appropriate circumstances be sufficient to satisfy the requirements of the Rehabilitation Act.
9. ITY nccess has general ly been found to satis(y the minimu111 req uirements of28 C.F.R. § 19.160(a)(2) that telecommunication devices must be provided for deaf persons . See Douglas v Ousman, 567 F. Supp. 2d 877, 887 (E. D. I.a. 2008); ~imrlock v ,\'immons. 88 F. Supp. 2d 1189,
I 196 (D. Kan . 2000). I0. Regulations state that in determining what type of auxiliary aid is necessary, the agency shall
g ive primary conside ration to the rt!qucsts of the handicapped individual. 28 C.F.R. § 39.160(a)( I )(i).
I I . Regulatio ns s tate that an agency "need not provide individually prescribed devices, readers for personal usc or study, or other devices of a personal nature." 2H C.F.R. § 39.160(a)( I )(ii). 12. USP Tucson is not in compliance with the Lettc:r of Findings with respect to the provision of 1\SL interpreters to David Bryant for medical encounters and educational programs. 13. USP T ucson is not fully in compliance ·with the Letter of Findings with respect to notification o f emergencies.
14. USP Tucson is not fully in compliance with the Letter of Findings with respect to the
provision of telecommunication services. 15. US P Tucson is in full compliance with the Letter of Findings with respect to providing David Bryant with hearing aid batteries anJ access to clo-;cd caption televis ion viewing. 16. Applying the Rehabilitation Act in the context of a prison selling must giYe due conside ration to the reasonable requirements of effective prison administratio n. See Cotes v. Rowland. 39 f.3d 1439, 1446-47 (9th Cir. 1994).

Exhibit B. Page 62

• 00/00/201C3ase122::1191:-2c7v-0FA0X25241-3C2A4S~9-D99T0B

DocuNmAeTnIOt N8W9-ID2E FLiEleGdAL12/20/13 #:1076

Page 14 of 30

Page ID

()7

16
IV. RECOMMENDF.D REMEDI ES 1\. Qualified Interpreters
HOP is required to comply with the Let ter o f Findings, in all rcspct:ts and without delay, regarding the provision of qualified /\SL Interpreters whether by using live interpreters or VRI st:rviccs. Live mterpreters are preferred for medical and disciplinary e ncounters. Hy way of additional clarification, mcdit:al prograr11s do not inclutlc David Hryant's partit:ipation in the nightly pi II line f<>r the purpost: of receiving prcscrihcd medications. The programs and services e ncompassed in this order include all programs and services provided to inmates at USP J'ucson. This means thut whenever David Bryant auends an educational program (other than a computerdirected course that does not require interaction with o thers), meets with a healthcare provider (other than fo r the pill line), o r p:micipatcs in a di scipli nary proceeding o r in a thcrapeut ic, vocational, or o ther program, a qualified ASL interpreter is to be provided lor him. For purposes uf these encounters inmates and staff are not quali fi ed interpreters. Certified interprete rs arc qualified, and o thers may be if their ski lis are measured by an objective standard . Live interpreters are preferred whenever possible for medical appointments, d isciplinary proceedings, o r o ther high stakes sellings. VRI services arc required to comply with the standards set o ut at § 35 . 160(d). Fo r the first year after the issuance of a final ord er !n this matter. USP T ucson will file quarterly compliance reports with the Complaint Adjudication Officer pursuant to 28 C.r.R . § 39.170(/)(2) setting out each occasion during the period on which David Bryant participated in a program or service o ffered by USP Tucson, whether a n /\S L inlcrpreter was provided to him live or by VRI , a nd under what standard it was de termined that the interpreter was qualified. The necessity of further reporting after the first year will be determined and communicated to US I' J'ucson dmi ng the fourth quarter.
l3. Notification of Emergencies As noted in the Letter of Findings, the assignment of an inmate companion coupled with o the r methods sut:h ac; visual alarms may under appropriate circumstances be enough to satisfy regulatory requirements. but this is true only if the significance of the visual alarms is clearly communicated to nonhcaring individuals a nd specific instructions arc p rovided as to what the nonhearing individuals are expected to do in response to each. Specific training with the assiswncc of an ASI interpreter whether live or by VRJ must be provided to David Bryant as soon as practicable to ensure that he is made aware of precisely what he is to do in response to the blue and the amber light. An opportunity will be afforded to him to ask questions.

Ex hib it B, Page 63

00/00/201C3 as1e22: :1191:-2c7v-0F'J0\X25241-3C2A49S9-9D9T0B DocuNmAeTnIOtN8W9I-D2E FLEilGeAdL12/20/13 Page 15 of 30 Page ID #:1077

68

17
C. Te lecommunications Because David Oryant is not currently bei ng provided with act:ess to telecommunications that is co111parablc to the access provided to hearing imnmcs, USP Tucson will do whatever is necessary to provide David Hry:.~nt with at least occasion<~l opportunities to accc<>s TTY services in the evenings and on weekends. lhis means that sufticicnt staff must be trained in the use of TTY equipment 'iO that David Bryant" s access to r rY does not dcpcnu upon the:: presence or av<lilability o r a single stall member. US P Tucson has the option of providing telecommunicati ons access li> r David 13ryant by VRS rather than TTY anu is tlirc~.:ted to explore the possibility of implementing the former technology with all deliberate speed.
D. IIcaring Aid Ba11 erics and Closed Caption Television USP Tucson is in compliance with the Letter of Find ings with respect to the provision of hearing aid batteries and closed caption television, and will continm: such compliance. V. ATTORNEY'S FEES Finally. David Bryant requested a period of forty-live days in which to submit his appl ication for attorney" s fees with supponing documents. Regu lations governing this :1d ministrative proceeding. 28 C.F.R. part 3{), however, contain no provision for an award of attomey'~ fees. David Bry:.lllt's fee request is made exclusively pursuant to 29 U.S.C. ~ 794a(b). which provides that ··[i]n any action or proceeding to enforce or charge a violation of a provision of this subchapter, the court, in its Jiscretion, may allow the pre::vailing party, other than the United S tates, a r~asonable attorney 's fcc as part of the costs.'· Whether attorney's fees are recoverable f()r services performed in administrative proceedings is, of course, a separate question from whether the administrative forum itself has the authority to m~tke such an awaru. While 29 L.S.C. § 794a(b) makes clear that fees are recoverable. the statutory language confers the authority to make a tee award to the coun, and makes no mention of the administrnti ve;: adjudicator. In New York Gaslight Club v. Corey, Inc., 447 U.S. 54, 6 1 ( 1980), the coun interpreted the <;arne language in the attomcy's fees provision in Title VI I, 42 U.S.C. § 2000c-5(k), to mean that the statute authorized an independent action in district court lor attorney's fees for work done in mandatory adminjstrutive proceedings. While Gasli!:hl Cluh was subsequently criticized in North Carolina Department ofTransporration v. CresrStreer Community Council. Jm:., 479 U.S. 6, 21 ( 1986), it is evidently still good law and is followed in the Ninth Circuit. See. e.g., J>orrer v. Winter, 603 F.3d 11 13, 11 14-18 (9th Cir. 20 I0); Cal. Ass 'n ufPhysically f/andimpped, inc. v. FCC, 72 1 F.2d 667. 671 (9th Cir. 1983).
Exhibit 8 . Page 64

• • 00/00/201C3ase122::1191:-2c7v-0tA0X25241-3C2A4S99-D99T0B DocuNmAeTnIOtN8W9J-U2E FLiEleGdAL12/20/13 Page 16 of 30 Page ID #:1078

69

18

The absence of any mention of attorney's fees in 28 C.F.R. part39 suggests that the award of

attorney's fees pursuant to § 794a(b) is exclusive tu the district courts. While the rcgulutions

make specific provisions for allocating the costs and expenses of a hearing, 28 C.P.R.

§39. 170{k)(5). in<.:luding travel expenses for Lhe complainant, 28 C.F.R. §39. 170(k)(5)(iv), uml

Lhe expenses of the administrative law judge and the court reporter, 28 C.F.R. § 39.170(k)(5)(v),

no prov1sion is made for attorney's fees . Allhough 28 C. F.R. § 39. 170(k)(3) directs that the

adjudicative proceJures should comply with 5 U.S.C. §§ 554-557 (sections 5-8 of the

Administrative Procedure Act) and authorizl:s the admmistrative Jaw judge to take any action

permitted by§§ 5'i 1-559 thereof, it makes no reference to the Equal Access to Justice Act

(EAJA). 5 U.S.C. proccec.J .lllgs.5

§

504.

which

authorizes

the

imposition

of attorney's

fees

in

agency

Nor tall it ligh tly be concluded that tl1e omission in 29 U.S.C. § 794a(b) of authority for imposing Ices at the administrative level was other than dclibenJtC. Congress is well <nvarc or hO\\ to authorize fee awards at the agency level when it waJ1ls to do so. rhe corresponding provision ofthe Americans with Disabilities Act (AD/\), 42 U.S.C. § 12205 (emphasis added), for example, says that "[iJn any action or administrative proceedin~ commenced pursuant to this chapter, the court or agency, in its discretion. may allow the prevailing party, other than the
or United States, a reasonable attorney's fee ... ." Had the congressional intent been to pem1it the
award attorney's fees under§ 794a(b) to be made in the course or administrative proceedings, the means to accomplish that were at hand. They were not utilized.

This result is consistent as weJJ with the federal courts' approach to similar statutory language in the attorney's fcl!s provision::; of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDE/\), 20 U.S.C § I 415(i)(3)(n) (2005). See P N. v. Seau/e Sch Dist. No I , 458 F.3d 983, 986-87 (9th Cir, 2006), amended and superseded on other grounds on denial ofreh 'g, 474 r:.Jd I 165, 1169 (9th f'ir. 2007); Lucht v. At/olalla River Sch Dis/., 225 F.Jd I 023, I 025-26 (9th Cir. 2000); Bar/ow-Gresham Union 1/igh Sch. Dist. No . 2 v. Mitchell, 940 F.2d I 280, t 2~5 (9th Cir. 1991 ); McSomebodies v. Burlingame Elementary Sch. Disl., 897 F.2d 974 (9th Cir. 1989) (under Ilandicapped Children's Protection Act, predecessor of mEA).

The weight of this authority compels the conclusion that it is the district court, and not the administrative law judge or hearing ollicer, that is invested by 29 U.S.C § 794a(b) with the power to award fees for services in this proceeding. David Bryant 's fee request must accordingly be addressed to that forum.

5 That Justice Department regulations confonn the adjudicatory procedures more closely to those required for formal adjudication under the APA does not operate to convert the action to one "governed by"§ 554 for £1\JA purposes. Ardestani v INS, 502 U.S. I29, I32-34 (1991 ). Section 554 applies to "every case of adjudication requi red by statute to be determined on the record after opportunity for nn agency hearing." This is not such a cnse.
Exhibit B, Page 65

• 00/00/201C3ase122::11q1:-2c7v-0FA0X25241-3C2A4S~9-D99T0B

DocuNmAeTnIOt N8W9-ID2E FLiEleGdAL12/20/13 #:1079

Page 17 of 30

Page ID

70

19 RECOMMENDED ORD ER The remedies Sl!t forth herein are to he implemented effective imn1ediatcly upon issuance of a
final order and arc limited w lhe BOP facility at US P ·1ucson. In the event David Uryant is transferred to another institution within the AOP , however, there sha ll be a rebuttable presumption that the same remedies wil l accompany him and be made available to him at the other institution as well.
SOOHDERED.
Dated and entered this 20th day or June, :w IJ .
-~-ere~
Ell en K. Thomas Administrative Law Judge
Appeal Information Any party may fi le exceptions to the recommended decision with the Complaint Adjudication Officer within lil1cen days of the party's receipt of the recommended decision. Thereafter, each party will have ten days to file reply exceptions with the Offi cer. 28 C.F.R. § 39. 170(k)(7).

Exhibit I3, Page 66

• 00/00//.01C3ase122::1191:-2c7v-0tA0X25241-3C2A4S99-D99T0B

• DocuNmAeTnIOt N8v9J-I2DE FLiEleGdAL12/20/13 Page 18 of 30 #:1080

Page ID

71

20

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby c.:crti ly lhut on this 20th day of June, 20 13. I have served copies of the forego ing Recommended Decision with findi ng of f-act, Conclusions of L1w and Remedies on the following persons at the addresses indicated:

Mauhcw Fitzwater, Esq. 32m.! Floor 125 Uroad St. New York, NY I 0004-2~98
Deborah GolJcn. F.sq. Washington Lawyers' Commirtcc for Civil Rights anti Urban Artilirs 11 Dupont Circle, N.\V ., Suite 400 Washington. DC 20036

Richard roscano Director
U.S. Department of Justice Equal Employment Opportunity Stan· Justice Management Division 145M St.. NE Sui te I \V801 Washington, DC 20530

l larlan Penn, Esq. Western Regional Counsel Federal Ourcau of Prisons 7338 Shordinc Dr. Stockton. CA 952 19

Theresa T. Tnlpl<lcido. Esq. f.Cl Tucson r:eJcral Corrcctionul Institution 8901 S. Wilmot Rd. Tucson. AZ 85706

Mina Raskin EEO Officer U.S. Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Prisons 320 f:irst St., NW Washington, DC 20534
Mark L. Gross Complaint Adjudication Officer U.S. Department of Justice 950 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Room A48 10 Washington, DC 20530

r

t-f. , ·'",\v,~1Ko
Deltici~t

.JA (Vvlv
R. Boyd

r'LV

·("Jb?ll !!·"~.
/ j

Lega l Administrative Specialist to

Ellen K . Thomas

Administrative Law Judge

Offi ce of the Chief Admi nistrative II caring Officer

5107 Leesburg Pike, Suite 1905

FaJis Church, VA 22041

(703) 305- 1742 Phone

(703) 305-15 15 Fax

Exh ibit 8 . Page 67

 
 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case No. Title

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

2:11-cv-00254-CAS(DTBx)

Date March 26, 2014

DAVID BRYANT V. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, ET AL.

Present: The Honorable CHRISTINA A. SNYDER

Catherine Jeang

Not present

N/A

Deputy Clerk

Court Reporter / Recorder

Tape No.

Attorneys Present for Plaintiff:

Attorneys Present for Defendant

Not present

Not present

Proceedings:

(IN CHAMBERS): DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO CHANGE VENUE TO DISTRICT OF ARIZONA (Dkt. #93, filed February 18, 2014)

The Court finds this motion appropriate for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. Civ. P. 78; Local Rule 7-15. Accordingly, the hearing date of April 7, 2014, is vacated, and the matter is hereby taken under submission.
I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
Plaintiff David Bryant filed this action on January 7, 2011. Dkt. #1. The operative First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) asserts claims against the Federal Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”), BOP Director Charles Samuels, Jr., and Juan Castillo, the Regional Director of the BOP’s Western Region. Dkt. #89. Plaintiff’s claims arise under the First, Fifth, and Eighth Amendments to the United States Constitution, and the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. § 701, et seq. Id. Plaintiff alleges that he has been in BOP custody since August 2005, and that he has been deaf since early childhood. FAC ¶¶ 1-2. He further alleges that he has been housed at five different BOP facilities since 2005, including United States Penitentiary (“USP”) Hazelton in West Virginia, USP Coleman I in Florida, USP Victorville in California, USP Canaan in Pennsylvania, and USP Tuscon in Arizona. Id. ¶ 95. The gravamen of plaintiff’s claims is that the BOP has failed to provide him with “auxiliary aids and accommodations necessary to provide him with meaningful access to prison programs and activities on an equal basis with hearing individuals.” Id. ¶

CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 1 of 5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case No. Title

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

2:11-cv-00254-CAS(DTBx)

Date March 26, 2014

DAVID BRYANT V. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, ET AL.

1. Plaintiff was housed at USP Victorville at the time that he filed the initial complaint in this action, and was housed at USP Tuscon at the time that he filed the FAC.1 Id. ¶ 7.
Defendants filed a motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) to transfer this action to the District of Arizona. Dkt. #93. Plaintiff filed an opposition on March 17, 2014, dkt. #94, and defendants replied on March 24, 2014, dkt. #95. After considering the parties’ arguments, the Court finds and concludes as follows.

II. LEGAL STANDARD
“A district court may transfer any civil action to any other district or division where it might have been brought or to any district or division to which all parties have consented.” 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). In deciding a motion to transfer, the Court must consider the following three factors: (1) the convenience of the parties; (2) the convenience of the witnesses; and (3) the interests of justice. Id.; see Los Angeles Mem’l Coliseum Comm’n v. NFL, 89 F.R.D. 497, 499 (C.D. Cal. 1981).
In analyzing the “interests of justice,” a number of factors are relevant, including the following: (1) the location where the relevant agreements were negotiated and executed, (2) the state that is most familiar with the governing law, (3) the plaintiff’s choice of forum, (4) the respective parties’ contacts with the forum, (5) the contacts relating to the plaintiff’s cause of action in the chosen forum, (6) the differences in the costs of litigation in the two forums, (7) the availability of compulsory process to compel attendance of unwilling non-party witnesses, and (8) the ease of access to sources of proof. Stewart Org. v. Ricoh Corp., 487 U.S. 22, 29-30 (1988); Jones v. GNC Franchising, Inc., 211 F.3d 495, 498-99 (9th Cir. 2000). Other factors that can be considered are: the enforceability of the judgment; the relative court congestion in the two forums; and which forum would better serve judicial economy. 17 Moore’s Federal Practice § 111.13[1][c] (3d ed. 1997).

1 Based on the parties’ representations in the briefing on the present motion, it appears that plaintiff remains housed at USP Tuscon.

CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 2 of 5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case No. Title

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

2:11-cv-00254-CAS(DTBx)

Date March 26, 2014

DAVID BRYANT V. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, ET AL.

However, “[s]ubstantial weight is accorded to the plaintiff’s choice of forum, and a court should not order a transfer unless the ‘convenience’ and ‘justice’ factors set forth above weigh heavily in favor of venue elsewhere.” Catch Curve, Inc. v. Venali, Inc., 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 96379, *3-4 (C.D. Cal. 2006)
The party seeking to transfer venue bears the burden of showing that convenience and justice require transfer. Commodity Futures Trading Comm’n v. Savage, 611 F.2d 270, 278-279 (9th Cir. 1979); Decker Coal Co. v. Commonwealth Edison Co., 805 F.2d 834, 843 (9th Cir. 1986) (“The defendant must make a strong showing of inconvenience to warrant upsetting the plaintiff’s choice of forum.”). The decision to transfer lies within the sound discretion of the trial judge. See Sparling v. Hoffman Constr. Co., 864 F.2d 635, 639 (9th Cir. 1988).
III. DISCUSSION
Defendants argue that this action should be transferred to the District of Arizona for three reasons. First, defendants argue that this action “might have been brought” in the District of Arizona, as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), because the allegations in the FAC focus primarily on plaintiff’s conditions of incarceration at USP Tuscon. Mot. Transfer at 10; Reply at 2-4. Second, defendants argue that the District of Arizona is a more convenient forum for the parties and witnesses because plaintiff is no longer incarcerated in California, and is now incarcerated in Tuscon, Arizona. Id. at 15-18; Reply at 5-15. Thus, according to defendants the evidence pertaining to plaintiff’s current conditions of incarceration is located in Arizona. Id. Third, defendants argue that the District of Arizona has a less congested docket, and will therefore be able to provide a speedier resolution of this matter. Id. at 18.
Plaintiff responds that transfer is improper because this action could not have been brought in Arizona, since, at the time of the filing of the original complaint in January 2011, plaintiff was incarcerated at USP Victorville, and had no connection with the District of Arizona. Opp. at 12-13. Next, plaintiff argues that the convenience of the parties and witnesses weighs against transfer. In this regard, plaintiff states that he is represented by pro bono counsel based in Los Angeles, Washington, D.C., and New York City, and litigating in Arizona would require a significant additional expenditure of time

CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 3 of 5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case No. Title

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

2:11-cv-00254-CAS(DTBx)

Date March 26, 2014

DAVID BRYANT V. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, ET AL.

and money compared to the costs associated with litigating in this district. Id. at 14. Plaintiff also argues that many relevant witnesses are located outside Arizona, including employees in the BOP’s central and regional offices (including defendants Castillo and Samuels), and witnesses employed at the other prisons at which plaintiff has previously been housed. Id. at 14-16. Additionally, plaintiff argues that a transfer would not serve the interests of justice for many of the same reasons that transfer would not be convenient for witnesses, the parties, or plaintiff’s counsel. Id. at 17-23. Finally, plaintiff notes that he could be transferred to another BOP facility at any time, thereby eliminating any potential benefit of transfer of this action to the District of Arizona. Id. at 21.
After considering the parties’ arguments, the Court finds that transfer is not appropriate at this time.2 While plaintiff is currently incarcerated in Tuscon, there is no guarantee that he will remain there throughout the pendency of this action.3 The interests of judicial economy will not be served if this Court transfers this action, only to see plaintiff transferred to yet another judicial district at a later date. See 17 Moore’s Federal Practice § 111.13[1][c] (3d ed. 1997). Moreover, while relevant witnesses and evidence may be present in Tuscon, plaintiff represents that relevant witnesses and evidence are also located at the BOP Western Regional Office in Stockton, California, the Central Office in Washington, D.C., and other BOP facilities including USP Victorville, which is located in the Central District of California. Thus, the convenience of potential witnesses does not favor transfer. See Cohran v. NYP Holdings, Inc., 58 F. Supp. 2d 1113, 1119 (C.D. Cal. 1998). Finally, plaintiff’s pro bono counsel is not based in Arizona, and represents that they are not admitted to the bar in Arizona, and “[n]umerous courts have found that, where a transfer of venue would upset or destroy a pro bono counsel relationship due to increased costs and inconvenience, that fact weighs against transfer of

2 The Court need not address whether this action “might have been brought” in the District of Arizona, see 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). This is so because even if the action might have been brought in that district, transfer would nonetheless be inappropriate for the reasons set forth herein.

3 Defendants’ representation that BOP has “no current intention to transfer” plaintiff to another facility does not foreclose the possibility that defendant may be transferred to another BOP facility at some future time. Reply at 7.

CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 4 of 5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case No. Title

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

2:11-cv-00254-CAS(DTBx)

Date March 26, 2014

DAVID BRYANT V. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, ET AL.

the action.” See Azarm v. $1.00 Stores Servs., Inc., 2009 WL 1588668, at *6 (M.D. Tenn. June 5, 2009). For these reasons, the Court finds that transfer is not warranted.
IV. CONCLUSION
In accordance with the foregoing, the Court hereby DENIES defendants’ motion to transfer without prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

Initials of Preparer

00

:

00

CMJ

CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 5 of 5

 
 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case No. Title

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

2:11-cv-00254-CAS(DTBx)

Date June 2, 2014

DAVID BRYANT V. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, ET AL.

Present: The Honorable CHRISTINA A. SNYDER

Catherine Jeang

Laura Elias

N/A

Deputy Clerk

Court Reporter / Recorder

Tape No.

Attorneys Present for Plaintiff:

Attorneys Present for Defendant

Rory Culver Adam Paris Andrew Gelfand

Monica Miller, AUSA Chung Han, AUSA

Proceedings:

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS (Dkt. #99, filed April 9, 2014)

I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

Plaintiff David Bryant filed this action on January 7, 2011. Dkt. #1. The operative First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) asserts claims against the Federal Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”), BOP Director Charles Samuels, Jr., and Juan Castillo, the Regional Director of the BOP’s Western Region. Dkt. #89. The FAC asserts five claims for violation of the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 794, et seq., a claim for violation of the Rehabilitation Act and the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, and claims for violation of the First, Fifth, and Eighth Amendments. Id. Plaintiff, a deaf individual, primarily alleges that, as a result of BOP policies, he does not receive the “auxiliary aids and accommodations necessary to provide him with meaningful access to prison programs and activities on an equal basis with hearing individuals.” Id. ¶ 1.

Prior to the filing of the FAC, plaintiff exhausted the BOP’s internal prison grievance administrative process, and also completed the separate administrative process mandated by 28 C.F.R. § 39.170 (the “Administrative Process”), which the Court previously found to be mandatory for plaintiff’s claims under the Rehabilitation Act. See dkt. #32. During the Administrative Process, a hearing was held before an administrative law judge (“ALJ”). After the hearing, the ALJ issued proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law, which recommended that plaintiff be provided with a series of accommodations to enable him to access prison programs and activities. See FAC Ex. B. A United States Department of Justice Complaint Adjudication Officer adopted the ALJ’s

CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 1 of 9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case No. Title

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

2:11-cv-00254-CAS(DTBx)

Date June 2, 2014

DAVID BRYANT V. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, ET AL.

decision as final, see FAC Ex. E (the “Administrative Decision”), with exceptions not relevant here. While plaintiff alleges that the Administrative Decision “represents a significant victory” for him, he also alleges that it does not provide all of the relief to which he is entitled under the Rehabilitation Act and the United States Constitution. He therefore seeks additional relief as set forth in the FAC.

On April 9, 2014, defendants filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6). Dkt. #99. Plaintiff filed an opposition on May 12, 2014, dkt. #101, and defendants replied on May 19, 2014, dkt. #102. The Court held a hearing on June 2, 2014. After considering the parties’ arguments, the Court finds and concludes as follows.

II. LEGAL STANDARD

A. Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1)
A motion to dismiss an action pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) raises the question of the federal court’s subject matter jurisdiction over the action. The objection presented by this motion is that the court has no authority to hear and decide the case. This defect may exist despite the formal sufficiency of the allegations in the complaint. See T.B. Harms Co. v. Eliscu, 226 F. Supp. 337, 338 (S.D. N.Y. 1964), aff’d 339 F.2d 823 (2d Cir. 1964) (the formal allegations must yield to the substance of the claim when a motion is filed to dismiss the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction). When considering a Rule 12(b)(1) motion challenging the substance of jurisdictional allegations, the Court is not restricted to the face of the pleadings, but may review any evidence, such as declarations and testimony, to resolve any factual disputes concerning the existence of jurisdiction. See McCarthy v. United States, 850 F.2d 558, 560 (9th Cir. 1988).
The burden of proof in a Rule 12(b)(1) motion is on the party asserting jurisdiction. See Sopcak v. N. Mountain Helicopter Serv., 52 F.3d 817, 818 (9th Cir. 1995); Ass’n of Am. Med. Coll. v. United States, 217 F.3d 770, 778-79 (9th Cir. 2000). If jurisdiction is based on a federal question, the pleader must show that he has alleged a claim under federal law and that the claim is not frivolous. See 5B Charles A. Wright & Arthur R. Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure, § 1350, pp. 211, 231 (3d ed. 2004). On the other

CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 2 of 9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case No. Title

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

2:11-cv-00254-CAS(DTBx)

Date June 2, 2014

DAVID BRYANT V. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, ET AL.

hand, if jurisdiction is based on diversity of citizenship, the pleader must show real and complete diversity, and also that his asserted claim exceeds the requisite jurisdictional amount of $75,000. See id.

B. Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6)
A Rule 12(b)(6) motion tests the legal sufficiency of the claims asserted in a complaint. “While a complaint attacked by a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss does not need detailed factual allegations, a plaintiff’s obligation to provide the ‘grounds’ of his ‘entitlement to relief’ requires more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do.” Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007). “[F]actual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level.” Id.
In considering a motion pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), a court must accept as true all material allegations in the complaint, as well as all reasonable inferences to be drawn from them. Pareto v. F.D.I.C., 139 F.3d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1998). The complaint must be read in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party. Sprewell v. Golden State Warriors, 266 F.3d 979, 988 (9th Cir. 2001); Parks Sch. of Bus., Inc. v. Symington, 51 F.3d 1480, 1484 (9th Cir. 1995). However, “[i]n keeping with these principles a court considering a motion to dismiss can choose to begin by identifying pleadings that, because they are no more than conclusions, are not entitled to the assumption of truth. While legal conclusions can provide the framework of a complaint, they must be supported by factual allegations.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1950 (2009); Moss v. United States Secret Service, 572 F.3d 962, 969 (9th Cir. 2009) (“[F]or a complaint to survive a motion to dismiss, the non-conclusory ‘factual content,’ and reasonable inferences from that content, must be plausibly suggestive of a claim entitling the plaintiff to relief.”) (citing Twombly and Iqbal); Sprewell, 266 F.3d at 988; W. Mining Council v. Watt, 643 F.2d 618, 624 (9th Cir. 1981). Ultimately, “[d]etermining whether a complaint states a plausible claim for relief will . . . be a context-specific task that requires the reviewing court to draw on its judicial experience and common sense.” Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. at 1950.
Furthermore, unless a court converts a Rule 12(b)(6) motion into a motion for summary judgment, a court cannot consider material outside of the complaint (e.g., facts

CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 3 of 9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case No. Title

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

2:11-cv-00254-CAS(DTBx)

Date June 2, 2014

DAVID BRYANT V. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, ET AL.

presented in briefs, affidavits, or discovery materials). In re American Cont’l Corp./Lincoln Sav. & Loan Sec. Litig., 102 F.3d 1524, 1537 (9th Cir. 1996), rev’d on other grounds sub nom Lexecon, Inc. v. Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach, 523 U.S. 26 (1998). A court may, however, consider exhibits submitted with or alleged in the complaint and matters that may be judicially noticed pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 201. In re Silicon Graphics Inc. Sec. Litig., 183 F.3d 970, 986 (9th Cir. 1999); Lee v. City of Los Angeles, 250 F.3d 668, 689 (9th Cir. 2001).
For all of these reasons, it is only under extraordinary circumstances that dismissal is proper under Rule 12(b)(6). United States v. City of Redwood City, 640 F.2d 963, 966 (9th Cir. 1981).
As a general rule, leave to amend a complaint which has been dismissed should be freely granted. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a). However, leave to amend may be denied when “the court determines that the allegation of other facts consistent with the challenged pleading could not possibly cure the deficiency.” Schreiber Distrib. Co. v. Serv-Well Furniture Co., 806 F.2d 1393, 1401 (9th Cir. 1986); see Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1127 (9th Cir. 2000).
III. DISCUSSION
As an initial matter, plaintiff contends that defendants’ motion is untimely. The Court agrees. This Court’s scheduling order provides that defendants “shall have 60 days from the filing and service of the [FAC] to answer or otherwise respond.” Dkt. #88. The FAC was filed on December 20, 2013, dkt. #89, thereby requiring defendants to answer or respond on or before February 18, 2014. On that date, defendants filed a motion to transfer this action to the District of Arizona pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), dkt. #93, which the Court subsequently denied without prejudice, dkt. #96. However, a motion to transfer “is not a responsive pleading, and . . . does not alter the time period by which a party must file their responsive pleading.” Lake v. Fellner, 2014 WL 664653, at *1 (D. Nev. Feb. 19, 2014); see also Meyer Mfg. Co. v. Telebrands Corp., 2012 WL 1189765, at *7 (E.D. Cal. April 9, 2012). Thus, to the extent that defendants’ motion argues that the FAC fails to state a claim pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), the Court declines to consider those arguments because the motion is untimely.

CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 4 of 9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case No. Title

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

2:11-cv-00254-CAS(DTBx)

Date June 2, 2014

DAVID BRYANT V. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, ET AL.

However, to the extent that defendants’ motion argues that plaintiff’s claims are moot or barred for failure to exhaust administrative remedies, the Court will consider those arguments below because they pertain to this Court’s subject matter jurisdiction over this action. See 5B Charles A. Wright & Arthur R. Miller, Fed. Practice & Proc. § 1350 (3d ed.) (noting that federal courts have a sua sponte obligation to examine the basis for their subject matter jurisdiction, and “an untimely motion simply will be treated as a suggestion that the court lacks jurisdiction”).
A. Mootness
Mootness is a jurisdictional defect that can be raised at any time by the parties or the court sua sponte. Barilla v. Ervin, 886 F.2d 1514, 1519 (9th Cir. 1989). “[A] case is moot when the issues presented are no longer ‘live’ or the parties lack a legally cognizable interest in the outcome.” County of Los Angeles v. Davis, 440 U.S. 625, 631 (1979) (quoting Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486, 496 (1969)). “Mere voluntary cessation of allegedly illegal conduct does not moot a case; it if did, the courts would be compelled to leave [t]he defendant . . . free to return to his old ways.” United States v. Concentrated Phosphate Export Ass’n, 393 U.S. 199 (1968) (quoting United States v. W.T. Grant Co., 345 U.S. 629, 632 (1953)); see also Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Slater, 528 U.S. 216, 222 (2000). Nevertheless, part or all of a case may become moot if (1) “subsequent events [have] made it absolutely clear that the allegedly wrongful behavior [cannot] reasonably be expected to recur,” Concentrated Phosphate, 393 U.S. at 203, and (2) “interim relief or events have completely and irrevocably eradicated the effects of the alleged violation.” Lindquist v. Idaho State Bd. of Corrections, 776 F.2d 851, 854 (9th Cir. 1985) (quoting Davis, 440 U.S. at 631, 99 S.Ct. at 1383). “The burden of demonstrating mootness ‘is a heavy one.’” Davis, 440 U.S. at 631, (quoting W.T. Grant, 345 U.S. at 632-33).
1. Mootness as to institutions other than USP Tucson
Defendants argue that plaintiff’s claims as to “institutions other than USP Tucson” are moot. In this regard, defendants argue that plaintiff is currently housed at USP Tucson, and contend that there is no “reasonable expectation” that plaintiff will suffer injury at any other facility. Thus, according to defendants, a live case or controversy

CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 5 of 9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case No. Title

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

2:11-cv-00254-CAS(DTBx)

Date June 2, 2014

DAVID BRYANT V. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, ET AL.

exists only as to the current conditions of plaintiff’s confinement at USP Tucson, and not as to any other BOP facilities.
This argument fails for two reasons. First, the FAC does not assert claims that are specific to particular BOP facilities. Rather, the FAC asserts claims that challenge the “institutional policies, practices, and/or customs of Defendants.” E.g., FAC ¶ 70. These defendants include officials with the power to set BOP policy that stretches beyond individual facilities, such as BOP director Charles Samuels, Jr. Thus, defendants’ reference to plaintiff’s “claims . . . as to institutions other than USP Tucson” appears to be a mischaracterization of the nature plaintiff’s claims. Moreover, since plaintiff’s claims are directed at BOP’s policies implemented by high-level BOP officials, and not just particular conditions at specific facilities, plaintiff’s claims cannot be rendered moot as a result of a transfer from one facility to another. See Nelson v. Heiss, 271 F.3d 891, 897 (9th Cir. 2001) (holding that plaintiff’s claims against prison officials under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 were not rendered moot by transfer to different facility because claims were asserted against director of entire state prison system); Jordan v. Sosa, 654 F.3d 1012, 1028 (10th Cir. 2011) (“[W]here a prisoner brings a lawsuit challenging policies that apply in a generally uniform fashion throughout a prison system, courts have been disinclined to conclude that the prisoner’s declaratory or injunctive claims are moot, even after he has been transferred to another prison in that system.”).
Next, even accepting defendants’ characterization of plaintiff’s claims as pertaining to specific institutions, a case becomes moot based on a defendant’s voluntary conduct only “if subsequent events [make] it absolutely clear that the allegedly wrongful behavior could not be reasonably expected to recur.” Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Envtl. Servs., 528 U.S. 167, 189 (2000). While defendants assert that there is no “reasonable expectation” that plaintiff will suffer injury at another BOP facility besides USP Tucson, that assertion is undermined by plaintiff’s allegation that he has been housed at five different BOP facilities since 2005, including USP Hazelton in West Virginia, USP Coleman I in Florida, USP Victorville in California, USP Canaan in Pennsylvania, and USP Tucson in Arizona. Id. ¶ 95. Based on this allegation, it appears possible that plaintiff could be transferred to another BOP facility at any time, including the facilities listed above. Accordingly, the Court finds that plaintiff’s claims are not moot as to facilities other than USP Tucson because the harms alleged in the FAC could recur at those facilities if a transfer occurs.

CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 6 of 9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case No. Title

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

2:11-cv-00254-CAS(DTBx)

Date June 2, 2014

DAVID BRYANT V. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, ET AL.

Defendants resist this conclusion on the grounds that the Administrative Decision establishes a “rebuttable presumption” that the remedies provided at USP Tucson will “accompany [plaintiff] and be made available to him at . . . other institution[s] as well.” FAC Ex. B at 66. Thus, according to defendants, the Administrative Decision provides systemwide relief. The Court finds this contention unpersuasive because the existence of a rebuttable presumption does not make it “absolutely clear” that plaintiff will receive the same relief if he is transferred to another facility. See Friends of the Earth, 528 U.S. at 189.

2. Mootness as to USP Tucson

Defendants also argue that plaintiff’s claims are moot to the extent that they challenge the conditions of his confinement at USP Tucson, because, at least at USP Tucson, plaintiff has obtained all of the relief that he sought in the Administrative Process. In support of this argument, defendants cite the following allegation in the FAC:

After years of Defendants depriving Bryant of required auxiliary aids and accommodations, Defendants recently have begun providing Bryant with many of the requested auxiliary aids and accommodations sought and ordered in the Administrative Decision. Defendants have started providing Bryant with qualified ASL interpreters for scheduled medical appointments and rehabilitative programs. Defendants installed a VRI system at USP Tucson so that interpreting services can be provided to Bryant both in-person as well as through VRI. Defendants allowed Bryant increased access to the [teletypewriter, or “TTY”], but only on weekdays. Defendants also installed a blue flashing light in Bryant’s housing unit and flashing amber lights on the guard tower in the recreation yard and assigned Bryant an “inmate companion” in an attempt to better notify him of emergencies and other important announcements. Defendants further installed several televisions in Bryant’s housing unit on which they enabled closed-captioning.

FAC ¶ 59. Based on these allegations, defendants contend that the FAC’s first four claims for relief, which seek the provision of qualified sign language (“ASL”) interpreters, a non-aural notification system, closed captioning, and hearing aids,

CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 7 of 9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case No. Title

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

2:11-cv-00254-CAS(DTBx)

Date June 2, 2014

DAVID BRYANT V. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, ET AL.

respectively, as well as the portion of the fifth claim seeking the provision of TTY, are moot because the complained-of conduct has ceased and is unlikely to recur.
This argument also fails. The FAC contains numerous allegations of persisting inadequacies in the accommodations that plaintiff is receiving, including at USP Tucson. In this regard, the FAC alleges that defendants fail to provide access to ASL interpreters in connection with all programs and services provided to plaintiff, FAC ¶ 72, fail to provide access to the TTY in evenings or on weekends, id. ¶ 17, fail to provide access to a videophone, id. ¶ 20, fail to provide “an adequate notification system,” id. ¶¶ 20, 74-75, and fail to provide “safe access to close-captioned television,” id. ¶ 79. Thus, based on the allegations in the FAC, defendants have not yet provided all of the relief that plaintiff is seeking, and the Court therefore finds that plaintiff’s claims are not moot as to conditions at USP Tucson.1

B. Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies
Defendants further argue that, to the extent that the FAC advances additional allegations of violations of the Rehabilitation Act, those allegations should be disregarded because plaintiff has failed to exhaust his administrative remedies with respect to those allegations.

The Court disagrees. “There is no question that exhaustion is mandatory under the [Prison Litigation Reform Act, or “PLRA”] and that unexhausted claims cannot be brought in court.” Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199 (2007). In order to exhaust a claim, “prisoners must complete the administrative review process in accordance with the applicable procedural rules [which are] defined not by the PLRA, but by the prison grievance process itself.” Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81, 88 (2006).

1 In their reply, defendants state that they are seeking to “narrow the issues” in this case so that the litigation can focus on “disagreements that remain,” and not on issues that have already been resolved in the Administrative Process. To the extent that defendants are seeking a partial adjudication of plaintiff’s various claims under the Rehabilitation Act, that goal is better pursued on a motion for summary judgment, and not on a motion to dismiss.

CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 8 of 9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case No. Title

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

2:11-cv-00254-CAS(DTBx)

Date June 2, 2014

DAVID BRYANT V. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, ET AL.

As stated above, the Court previously found that plaintiff must comply with the administrative exhaustion procedures set forth in 28 C.F.R. §39.170 with regard to his claims under the Rehabilitation Act. However, “[i]n order to exhaust their remedies, prisoners need not file multiple, successive grievances raising the same issue (such a prison conditions or policies) if the objectionable condition is continuing. Turley v. Rednour, 729 F.3d 645, 650 (7th Cir. 2013); see also Parzcyck v. Prison Health Servs., 627 F.3d 1215, 1219 (11th Cir. 2010) (holding that a prisoner was “not required to initiate another round of the administrative grievance process on the exact same issue each time” an alleged deprivation of rights occurred). Here, it is plain that the allegations in the FAC pertain to the same overarching issues addressed during the BOP grievance process and the Administrative Process, namely, BOP’s provision of various accommodations to plaintiff to allow him to access prison programs and services, as well as BOP’s associated policies. Compare FAC ¶ 1 with FAC Ex. B. Accordingly, the Court finds that plaintiff has properly exhausted his administrative remedies with respect to his claims under the Rehabilitation Act. See Turley, 729 F.3d at 650.

IV. CONCLUSION

In accordance with the foregoing, defendants’ motion to dismiss is hereby DENIED. Defendants are directed to file an answer to the FAC no later than July 2, 2014.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Initials of Preparer

00

:

14

CMJ

CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 9 of 9

 
 Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 170 Filed 02/17/17 Page 1 of 3 Page ID #:1813

1 Adam S. Paris (SBN 190693)

2

parisa@sullcrom.com SULLIVAN & CROMWELL LLP

1888 Century Park East, Suite 2100

3 Los Angeles, California 90067-1725

4

Telephone: (310) 712-6600 Facsimile: (310) 712-8800

5 DDeebboorraahh_GGoollddeenn@(Awdmasihttleadwp.orroghac vice)

6 WASHINGTON LAWYERS’ COMMITTEE

7

FOR CIVIL RIGHTS AND URBAN AFFAIRS 11 Dupont Circle, N.W., Suite 400

8

Washington, DC 20036 Telephone: (202) 319-1000

Facsimile: (202) 319-1010

9

10 Attorneys for Plaintiff David Bryant

11 [Additional Counsel listed on signature page]

12

13

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

14

FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

15

16 DAVID BRYANT,

)

17

)

Plaintiff,

)

)

18

v.

)

19 FEDERAL BUREAU OF

) )

20 PRISONS; et al.,

) )

Defendants. )

21

)

22

) )

23

) )

)

24

)

25

)

Case No. 11-cv-00254-CAS (DTB) JOINT REPORT REGARDING STATUS OF SETTLEMENT

26

27

28

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 170 Filed 02/17/17 Page 2 of 3 Page ID #:1814

1

On October 17, 2016, the parties advised the Court that they had

2 reached a tentative settlement of the action. [Dkt. #166.] The Court issued an

3 Order on October 19, 2016, requiring the parties to file a joint status report within

4 sixty days if the documentation regarding the settlement had not been finalized.

5 [Dkt. #167.] On December 19, 2016, the parties filed a joint status report noting

6 that settlement discussions were ongoing. [Dkt. #169.]

7

The parties have now reached a settlement and are working to finalize

8 the documentation. The parties expect to file such documentation with the Court

9 within 30 days.

10

11 Dated: February 17, 2017

Respectfully submitted,

12

13

By: /s/ Adam S. Paris

14

Adam S. Paris (SBN 190693)

15

parisa@sullcrom.com Brian R. England (SBN 211335)

16

englandb@sullcrom.com SULLIVAN & CROMWELL LLP

17

1888 Century Park East, Suite 2100 Los Angeles, California 90067-1725

18

Telephone: (310) 712-6600 Facsimile: (310) 712-8800

19

Deborah Golden (Admitted pro hac vice)

20

Deborah_Golden@washlaw.org WASHINGTON LAWYERS’

21

COMMITTEE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS AND URBAN AFFAIRS

22

11 Dupont Circle, N.W., Suite 400 Washington, DC 20036

23

Telephone: (202) 319-1000 Facsimile: (202) 319-1010

24 Attorneys for Plaintiff David Bryant
25

26

27

28

1

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 170 Filed 02/17/17 Page 3 of 3 Page ID #:1815

1 Dated: February 17, 2017 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

By: /s/ Monica L. Miller EILEEN M. DECKER United States Attorney DOROTHY A. SCHOUTEN Assistant United States Attorney Chief, Civil Division ROBYN-MARIE LYON MONTELEONE Assistant United States Attorney Chief, General Civil Section MONICA L. MILLER Assistant United States Attorney Attorneys for Defendants
2

 
 Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 172 Filed 03/08/17 Page 1 of 2 Page ID #:1820

1 EILEEN M. DECKER United States Attorney
2 DOROTHY A. SCHOUTEN Assistant United States Attorney
3 Chief, Civil Division ROBYN-MARIE LYON MONTELEONE
4 Assistant United States Attorney Chief, General Civil Section
5 MONICA L. MILLER (Cal. Bar No. 157695) Assistant United States Attorney
6 Room 7516, Federal Building 300 North Los Angeles Street
7 Los Angeles, California 90012 Telephone: (213) 894-4061
8 Facsimile: (213) 894-7819 Email: monica.miller@usdoj.gov

9 Attorneys for Federal Defendants
10

11

Adam S. Paris (State Bar No. 190693) parisa@sullcrom.com

12

1888 Century Park East, Suite 2100 Los Angeles, California 90067-1725

Telephone: (310) 712-6600

13 Facsimile: (310) 712-8800

14 Attorneys for Plaintiff David Bryant 15
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 16
FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 17
WESTERN DIVISION 18

19 DAVID BRYANT,
20 Plaintiff,
21 v.
22 FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS; et
23 al.,
24 Defendants.
25

No. CV 11-0254 CAS (DTBx) [PROPOSED] ORDER OF DISMISSAL

26 Plaintiff and Defendants have entered into a Stipulation for Compromise
27 Settlement and Release (Stipulation). Pursuant to the terms of the Stipulation, the parties
28

Case 2:11-cv-00254-CAS-DTB Document 172 Filed 03/08/17 Page 2 of 2 Page ID #:1821

1 agreed to request dismissal of the action with prejudice, with each party bearing its own

2 attorneys’ fees, costs and expenses. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

3

1. Plaintiff’s action is dismissed with prejudice in its entirety;

4

2. Each party shall bear its or their own costs of suit and fees.

5

6 Dated: March 8, 2017.

7

8

HONORABLE CHRISTINA A. SNYDER UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1