Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05878/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05878-45/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

U.S. District Court

 E. D. California 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOHN E. JAMES, III.,

Plaintiff,

v.

A. K. SCRIBNER, et al.,

Defendants.

__________________________________) 

CASE NO: 1:04-CV-5878 LJO DLB P 

ORDER GRANTING IN PART

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ISSUANCE

OF SUBPOENAS DUCES TECUM AND

PLACING PARTIES ON NOTICE THAT

THE SUBPOENAS TO THE INSPECTOR

GENERAL’S OFFICE AND THE CDCR

OFFICE OF INTERNAL AFFAIRS WILL

ISSUE AFTER FIVE DAYS FROM THE

DATE OF SERVICE OF THIS ORDER

(Doc. 223)

Plaintiff John E. James (“Plaintiff”) is a prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with

a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. section 1983. This action is proceeding on plaintiff’s amended

complaint, filed against numerous correctional guards at Corcoran State Prison (CSP) for allegedly using

excessive force on July 16, 2003, in violation of the Eighth Amendment.On June 7, 2007, Plaintiff filed

a motion for the issuance of a subpoena duces tecum, which was denied without prejudice to renewal

accompanied by an offer of proof concerning the existence of the documents and the location of the

documents. (Docs. 199, 222). Now pending before the court is plaintiff’s renewed motion, filed March

17, 2008. Fed. R. Civ. P. 45. (Doc. 223).

In plaintiff’s instant motion, he seeks from the California Inspector General’s Office all

Case 1:04-cv-05878-LJO -DLB Document 243 Filed 08/11/08 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

U.S. District Court

 E. D. California 2

documents reviewed by their office during their investigation into his allegations of excessive force.

Plaintiff also seeks from the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Office of Internal

Affairs (“CDCR-OIA”) all documents relevant to the investigation conducted by CDCR-OIA into

plaintiff’s allegations of excessive force. Plaintiff also requests “[A]ll documents written or created

since (June 2002 through December 2003), that contain, mention, or construe, or refer to any

inspections, ‘inquiry’, or complaint about excessive force by staff against (SHU) Inmates, whether

formal or informal, official or unofficial, including inmate, staff, & citizens grievance’s complaints &

appeals, & including responses to such documents prepared by responding agencies, staff, or their

agents.” (Emphasis in original.)

Plaintiff’s requests, as written, are overly broad. Plaintiff indicated during the telephonic trial

confirmation hearing held August 10, 2008 that he is namely interested in any statements made to the

California Inspector General’s Office or the CDCR-OIA during the courses of their investigations. The

Court shall grant plaintiff’s motion in part, and order both the California Inspector General’s Office and

the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Office of Internal Affairs, to produce any

and all statements, including but not limited to written or videotape statements, taken during the

course of their respective investigations into plaintiff’s allegation of use of excessive force against

him on July 16, 2003. 

As plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, he is entitled to service of the subpoena

by the United States Marshal. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d). Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45(b)(1),

this order provides the requisite notice to the parties that the Court will, after five days from the date of

service of this order, issue the subpoena and direct the United States Marshal to effect personal service.

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s motion for the issuance of a subpoena duces tecum, filed February 19,

2008, is GRANTED IN PART;

2. Pursuant to Rule 45(b)(1), the parties are placed on notice that a subpoena duces

tecum to the California Inspector General’s Office shall be issued after five (5) days 

from the date of service of this order; and 

3. Pursuant to Rule 45(b)(1), the parties are placed on notice that a subpoena duces

Case 1:04-cv-05878-LJO -DLB Document 243 Filed 08/11/08 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

U.S. District Court

 E. D. California 3

tecum to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Office of 

Internal Affairs, shall be issued after five (5) days from the date of service of this order.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: August 11, 2008 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

d274kd UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-05878-LJO -DLB Document 243 Filed 08/11/08 Page 3 of 3