Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-00446/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-00446-47/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

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Plaintiff Kevin Darnell Bryant (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff initiated this action on 

March 17, 2011. This action proceeds against Defendants Romero and Gallagher for alleged events 

occurring at Kern Valley State Prison. The matter is currently stayed pending the results of a 

settlement conference scheduled for June 2, 2015. 

On March 23, 2015, Plaintiff filed an ex parte motion for a court order to be issued to the 

Warden/Custodian of California Men’s Colony, East to allow Plaintiff to make confidential legal calls 

in order to retain representation at the settlement conference or related advice. Plaintiff indicates that 

he would have a third party pay for the cost of these calls. (ECF No. 186.) 

The pendency of this action does not give the Court jurisdiction over the Warden or any other 

prison official at the California Men’s Colony, East in San Luis Obispo, and the Court cannot issue an 

order requiring prison officials to grant Plaintiff access to the telephone. See, e.g., Summers v. Earth 

KEVIN DARNELL BRYANT,

 Plaintiff,

v.

GALLAGHER, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:11-cv-00446-LJO-BAM (PC)

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S EX PARTE 

MOTION FOR ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF 

TELEPHONE CALLS

(ECF No. 186)

Case 1:11-cv-00446-BAM Document 187 Filed 04/06/15 Page 1 of 2
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

Island Institute, 555 U.S. 488, 493, 129 S.Ct. 1142, 1149 (2009) (the plaintiff bears the burden of 

establishing standing for each form of relief he seeks in federal court); City of Los Angeles v. Lyons, 

461 U.S. 95, 101, 103 S.Ct. 1660, 1665 (1983); Mayfield v. United States, 599 F.3d 964, 969 (9th Cir. 

2010). Further, there is no indication that Plaintiff is unable to contact potential legal counsel by mail. 

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion is HEREBY DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 3, 2015 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:11-cv-00446-BAM Document 187 Filed 04/06/15 Page 2 of 2