Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-00446/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-00446-50/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

KEVIN DARNELL BRYANT,

Plaintiff,

v.

GALLAGHER, et al.,

Defendants.

1:11-cv-00446-LJO-BAM (PC)

ORDER REQUIRING THAT DEFENDANTS 

FILE A RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S 

MOTION FOR AN ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

(ECF No. 199)

Plaintiff Kevin Darnell Bryant (“Plaintiff”), 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 currently proceeds against Defendant Romero for deliberate indifference to serious 

medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment, and against Defendants Gallagher and 

Romero for conspiracy, retaliation in violation of the First Amendment, and failure to protect in 

violation of the Eighth Amendment. 

The parties are currently briefing Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment. (ECF No. 

176.). In the meantime, on June 29, 2015 Plaintiff filed a motion for an order to show cause. 

(ECF No. 199). In his motion for an order to show cause, Plaintiff alleges that “digital audio” 

Case 1:11-cv-00446-BAM Document 206 Filed 08/10/15 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

recordings related to certain events at issue in his case have been spoliated. Specifically, he 

alleges that he requested during discovery in this case recordings that he knows were made, but 

was told do not exist, and that he suspects have been destroyed when they should have been 

preserved. (Id. at pp. 2-8). Plaintiff submitted a declaration in conjunction with this motion, 

declaring that he was present when these recordings were made, observed the recording device or 

devices, and previously listened to portions of the recordings, ensuring that the events were 

actually recorded. (Bryant Decl. ¶¶ 4-12, ECF No. 199.) Plaintiff seeks as a sanction for the 

alleged spoliation of evidence that summary judgment be entered against Defendants on all 

claims.

Neither Defendant Gallagher nor Defendant Romero has filed a response to Plaintiff’s 

motion for an order to show cause. Accordingly, Defendants Gallagher and Romero are 

HEREBY DIRECTED to file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to the motion within 

twenty-one (21) days.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 7, 2015 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:11-cv-00446-BAM Document 206 Filed 08/10/15 Page 2 of 2