Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_01-cv-01351/USCOURTS-cand-3_01-cv-01351-167/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARCIANO PLATA, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER,

et al.,

Defendants.

NO. C01-1351 TEH

ORDER RE: RECEIVER’S

CONSTRUCTION OVERSIGHT

ADVISORY BOARD AND

REHABILITATION SERVICES

ADVISORY COUNCIL

The Receiver has appointed a Construction Oversight Advisory Board (“COAB”) and

will soon appoint a Rehabilitation Services Advisory Council (“RSAC”). Both of these

bodies consist of experts in their respective areas, all of whom will serve on a voluntary

basis, who will assist the Receiver in evaluating various aspects of the remedial plan in this

case.

This order makes clear that, like the Receiver and his staff, members of the COAB

and RSAC shall “have the status of officers and agents of this Court, and as such shall be

vested with the same immunities as vest with this Court.” Feb. 14, 2006 Order Appointing

Receiver at 6. As with the Court’s Advisory Board, these immunities extend to protect

members of the COAB and RSAC from discovery requests, including any requests to

produce documents they obtain from the Receiver or this Court. See Aug. 7, 2008 Order re:

Advisory Board’s Access to Docs. at 2.

In addition, communications between members of the COAB, RSAC, the Receiver,

the Advisory Board, and/or the Court concerning their duties as members of their respective

bodies shall be confidential and privileged. However, if a COAB or RSAC member believes

that he or she is required to disclose any confidential information as a result of other

professional responsibilities, then that board member shall discuss the particular

Case 3:01-cv-01351-JST Document 1546 Filed 10/07/08 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

circumstances with the Receiver. The Receiver will then raise the issue with the Court,

which will decide whether a waiver of confidentiality is appropriate under the circumstances.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 10/07/08 

THELTON E. HENDERSON, JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Case 3:01-cv-01351-JST Document 1546 Filed 10/07/08 Page 2 of 2