Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_21-cv-00262/USCOURTS-caed-2_21-cv-00262-22/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 

1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

AKIVA AVIKAIDA ISRAEL, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

SHMARYAHU BROWNSTEIN, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:21-cv-00262-TLN-EFB (PC) 

ORDER 

 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 

U.S.C. § 1983. The action proceeds on plaintiff’s second amended complaint, alleging that 

defendants have violated her constitutional rights to free exercise of religion and equal protection 

and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act. ECF Nos. 26, 28. 

Defendants have filed a motion for terminating sanctions or, alternatively, an order 

compelling plaintiff to participate in her deposition. ECF No. 78. Defendants argue that plaintiff 

has refused to be deposed and has also served deficient and untimely responses to written 

discovery. Id. Plaintiff responds that, during the relevant time period, she experienced 

“medically disabling episodes of epilepsy, urinary incontinence and acute mental incapacitating 

traumas, all ongoing as of 8/9/2023[.]” ECF No. 80. According to plaintiff, she “could not 

medically attend her deposition and comply with operative Discovery and Scheduling order” due 

to these issues, which caused a “sustained disruption to all vital brain functions.” Id. Plaintiff 

Case 2:21-cv-00262-TLN-EFB Document 82 Filed 09/13/23 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 

argues that she will be prejudiced if forced to respond to discovery until her medical issues are 

resolved. Id. “Presently, black-outs, lost time and memory loss are unmitigated. These rob 

[plaintiff] of sufficient cognitive capacities necessary to litigate for 2 to 3 months.” Plaintiff asks 

the court for relief from the present discovery schedule. Id. 

In reply to plaintiff’s representations regarding her medical condition, defendants 

recommend that the court either stay the case while plaintiff is unable to litigate or continue all 

dates by 90 days. ECF No. 81. 

Plaintiff’s opposition brief raises the issue of her competence. Plaintiff does not indicate 

whether or when her conditions may abate to such a degree that she can litigate this action. The 

court must address this potential issue, because Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 17(c)(2) requires 

the court to “appoint a guardian ad litem – or issue another appropriate order – to protect a minor 

or incompetent person who is unrepresented in an action.” While the court has discretion to craft 

such an order, an indefinite stay of proceedings is an abuse of discretion where it appears that the 

litigant will not regain competency in the future. Davis v. Walker, 745 F.3d 1303, 1311 (9th Cir. 

2014). 

In light of plaintiff’s representations regarding her health, the court will vacate all pending 

deadlines in this case. The parties shall submit status reports within 45 days of the date of this 

order indicating the current state of discovery (including any attempts to meet and confer) and 

plaintiff’s ability to litigate the action going forward. Once these reports have been submitted, the 

court will issue a revised schedule or other appropriate order. 

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that: 

1. Defendants’ August 4, 2023 motion for terminating sanctions or to compel discovery 

responses (ECF No. 78) is DENIED without prejudice; 

 

Case 2:21-cv-00262-TLN-EFB Document 82 Filed 09/13/23 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 45 days of the date of this order, the parties shall submit status reports 

informing the court of the current status of discovery, the current status of plaintiff’s 

health and ability to litigate the case (including any indication of future competence), 

and recommendations for the case going forward. 

 So ordered. 

Dated: September 13, 2023 

 

Case 2:21-cv-00262-TLN-EFB Document 82 Filed 09/13/23 Page 3 of 3