Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00880/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00880-11/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FRESNO DIVISION

John James, III, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

A.K. Scribner, et al., 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 07-880-TUC-RCC

ORDER

Pending before this Court is Plaintiff’s motion to communicate with witnesses. (Dkt.

# 54). In his motion, Plaintiff seeks a court order allowing him to communicate with inmates

he claims are witnesses to the claims raised in this action. For the reasons set forth below,

the Court will deny Plaintiff’s motion without prejudice.

Inmates may only correspond with one another if they obtain written authorization

form the appropriate prison officials. Cal.Code Regs., tit. 15 § 3139 (2010). The Court does

not have jurisdiction in this action over anyone other than Plaintiff and Defendants, and

cannot order Plaintiff be allowed to correspond with his witnesses. E.g. City of Los Angeles

v. Lyons, 461 U.S. 95, 102; Jones v. City of Los Angeles, 444 F.3d 1118, 1126 (9th Cir.

2006). However, the Court will request that Plaintiff and his inmate witnesses be authorized

to correspond if the Court is satisfied that the witnesses possess actual knowledge of relevant

Case 1:07-cv-00880-RC Document 75 Filed 05/26/10 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 -

facts. Plaintiff is required to make that showing with respect to each witness, and may not

rely on conclusory assertions that the witnesses possess relevant knowledge.

Here, Plaintiff has not made the requisite showing with respect to his witnesses. In

his motion, Plaintiff does not include the names of his inmate witnesses nor does he provide

the Court with a factual showing that these potential witnesses possess actual knowledge of

relevant facts. Plaintiff may renew his motion for the Court’s assistance in facilitating

communication with his inmate witnesses, supported by a factual showing that the witnesses

possess actual knowledge. If Plaintiff chooses to renew his motion, he must do so within 45

days from the date of service of this order. A motion filed after that date will not be

considered, unless a timely extension of time is sought by Plaintiff.

And finally, under no circumstances will this Court request Plaintiff be permitted to

correspond with other inmates shielded entirely from review or oversight by prison officials.

If Plaintiff renews his motion and makes the requisite showing, prison official are entitled

to and will be notified that they may fashion the procedure for the exchange of documents

so as to ensure the safety and security of the institutions at which Plaintiff and the other

inmates are housed.

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Communicate with

Witnesses (Dkt. #54) is denied without prejudice. Plaintiff may filed a renewed motion

within 45 days from the date of service of this order.

DATED this 25th day of May, 2010.

Case 1:07-cv-00880-RC Document 75 Filed 05/26/10 Page 2 of 2