Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-01908/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-01908-6/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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

OSCAR MARSHALL,

Plaintiff,

v.

PAM AHLIN, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:11-cv-01908 LJO DLB PC

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S 

MOTION TO ADD EXHIBIT TO 

OBJECTIONS

[ECF No. 43]

Plaintiff Oscar Marshall (“Plaintiff”) is a civil detainee in the custody of the California 

Department of Mental Health, detained pursuant to California’s Sexually Violent Predator Act 

(“SVPA”), Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code § 6600 et seq. This action is proceeding on Plaintiff’s complaint 

filed on November 16, 2011, against Defendants F. Moreno and R. Medina for violation of the 

Fourth Amendment and excessive force in violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth 

Amendment. On August 18, 2014, Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment. On January 

20, 2015, Plaintiff filed an opposition to the motion for summary judgment and a cross-motion for 

summary judgment. On January 28, 2015, Defendants filed a reply to Plaintiff’s opposition and an 

opposition to Plaintiff’s cross-motion. On February 13, 2015, Plaintiff filed a reply to Defendants’ 

opposition to his cross-motion. 

On March 10, 2015, Plaintiff filed the instant motion to submit newly discovered evidence. 

Defendants did not file an opposition. Plaintiff requests that he be permitted to add “Appendix K” to 

Case 1:11-cv-01908-LJO-DLB Document 44 Filed 04/22/15 Page 1 of 2
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

his appendix of documents attached to his opposition to Defendants’ motion for summary judgment. 

The Court will grant Plaintiff’s request. The document will be considered as part of the Appendix 

attached to Plaintiff’s opposition. However, the Court makes no ruling as to the relevance of the 

document.

ORDER

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1) Plaintiff’s motion to add Appendix K to his opposition is GRANTED;

2) Defendants are GRANTED twenty-one (21) days from the date of service of this order to 

amend their reply and address Appendix K, if necessary. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 22, 2015 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:11-cv-01908-LJO-DLB Document 44 Filed 04/22/15 Page 2 of 2