Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-00444/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-00444-17/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KEVIN DARNELL BRYANT,

Plaintiff,

v.

DR. SHAEFER, et al.,

Defendants.

_____________________________________/

Case No. 1:11-cv-00444-AWI-SKO (PC)

ORDER REQUIRING PARTIES TO (1) 

MEET AND CONFER BY TELEPHONE

REGARDING WITNESSES WITHIN 

FIFTEEN DAYS AND (2) FILE EITHER

STIPLULATION AND JOINT STATEMENT 

OR STATUS REPORTS WITHIN FIFTEEN 

DAYS AFTER MEETING AND 

CONFERRING

(Docs. 82 and 90)

Plaintiff Kevin Darnell Bryant, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, 

filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on March 17, 2011. This action is 

proceeding on Plaintiff’s amended complaint against Defendants Schaefer, Lopez, Keldgord, 

Harrington, and Flynn (“Defendants”) arising out of the policy and practice of crushing and 

floating Gabapentin and Tramadol, which led to internal injury to Plaintiff. Plaintiff alleges a 

claim for violation of his rights under the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution.

On June 19, 2014, this matter is scheduled for an evidentiary hearing on Defendants’ 

motion to dismiss for failure to exhaust, filed on March 20, 2013.142 U.S.C. § 1997e(a); Fed. R. 

 

1 An evidentiary hearing is required in light of the dispute between the parties regarding whether Plaintiff failed to 

exhaust or whether Plaintiff falls within an exception to the exhaustion requirement, as resolution of that dispute is 

dependent upon an assessment of witness credibility. Morton v. Hall, 599 F.3d 942, 945 (9th Cir. 2010); Wyatt v. 

Terhune, 315 F.3d 1108, 1119-20 (9th Cir. 2003). 

Case 1:11-cv-00444-AWI-SKO Document 91 Filed 04/02/14 Page 1 of 3
1

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

2

Civ. P. 12(b). Pursuant to Plaintiff’s various representations, made under penalty of perjury, the 

Court ordered Correctional Counselors Borum and Scott to appear for the hearing. On January 17, 

2014, Plaintiff represented he needs only the male counselor assigned to building D6 on February 

18, 2011, and he does not need Counselor Borum or Counselor Scott to testify. On March 24, 

2014, Plaintiff represented that he needs only Counselor Scott and whichever counselor or officer 

called him to the office for the phone call on February 18, 2011. 

At this juncture, the Court’s focus is on ensuring that all witnesses necessary to resolve 

Defendants’ motion to dismiss are present for the evidentiary hearing. Given that Defendants bear 

the burden of proof as the parties moving to dismiss, the responsibility for ensuring the appearance 

of witnesses competent to testify as to all issues relevant to resolution ultimately rests with them.

Akhtar v. Mesa, 698 F.3d 1202, 1210 (9th Cir. 2012). 

Based on Plaintiff’s most recent filings, Defendants are directed to meet and confer with 

Plaintiff by telephone in an effort to resolve any outstanding issues regarding witnesses. 

Thereafter, the parties shall file either a stipulation and joint statement regarding witnesses to 

appear at the hearing, if feasible, or separate status reports not to exceed five pages, if a stipulation 

and joint statement is not feasible.2

Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Within fifteen (15) days from the date of service of this order, Defendants shall 

meet and confer with Plaintiff in an effort to resolve any issues regarding witnesses to appear at 

the hearing; and

///

///

///

///

///

///

 

2

If separate status reports are filed, the parties must include a brief statement explaining the source of the parties’ 

disagreement regarding witnesses.

Case 1:11-cv-00444-AWI-SKO Document 91 Filed 04/02/14 Page 2 of 3
1

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

3

2. Within fifteen (15) days from the date of the meeting, the parties shall file either 

(1) a stipulation and joint statement regarding witnesses to appear at the hearing, if feasible, or (2) 

a separate status reports not to exceed five pages, if a stipulation and joint statement is not 

feasible.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 2, 2014 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:11-cv-00444-AWI-SKO Document 91 Filed 04/02/14 Page 3 of 3