Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-00240/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-00240-8/pdf.json

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

---

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

FREDERICK MARCELES COOLEY,

Plaintiff,

v.

CITY OF VALLEJO, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:14-cv-0240 DAD PS

ORDER

This matter came before the court on February 20, 2015, for the hearing of defendants’ 

motion for reconsideration. (Dkt. No. 45.) Attorney Furah Faruqui appeared on behalf of the 

defendants and plaintiff Frederick Marceles Cooley appeared on his own behalf.

Upon consideration of the arguments on file and at those made the hearing, and for the 

reasons set forth on the record at that hearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 

1. Defendants January 5, 2015 motion for reconsideration (Dkt. No. 45) is denied in part 

and granted in part as stated on the record at the February 20, 2015 hearing; 

2. On or before April 17, 2015, defendants shall produce to plaintiff all responsive 

documents for the prior seven years, as ordered in the court’s November 14, 2014 order, and an 

additional three years of limited responsive documents consisting of any complaints of excessive 

/////

/////

Case 2:14-cv-00240-EFB Document 56 Filed 02/23/15 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

force and the official resolution of those complaints1;

3. This order is without prejudice to plaintiff moving to compel additional documents 

related to three year period of limited document production after plaintiff receives defendants’ 

production; and

4. Within seven days of the date of this order each party shall file a proposed amended 

schedule for the remainder of this action.

Dated: February 20, 2015

DAD:6

Ddad1\orders.consent\cooley0240.oah.022015.docx

 

1

 The court’s November 14, 2014 order also ordered defendants to file a proposed stipulated 

protective order and serve a copy of that proposed stipulated protective order on the plaintiff. 

Defendants have not yet complied with that order. Accordingly, defendants shall file a proposed 

stipulated protective order and serve a copy of that document on the plaintiff forthwith. If 

plaintiff objects to any portion of the proposed stipulated protective order, plaintiff shall file those 

objections within fourteen days of being served with the copy of the proposed stipulated 

protective order.

Case 2:14-cv-00240-EFB Document 56 Filed 02/23/15 Page 2 of 2