Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-01380/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-01380-48/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 George H. Robinson (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil 

rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action is proceeding on the complaint against 

Defendants David, Miranda, Melo, Garcia, Mendoza, Martinez and Masiel for use of excessive force 

in violation of the Eighth Amendment; against Defendants Adams and Ruiz for failure to protect in 

violation of the Eighth Amendment; and against Defendants Martinez, David, Miranda and Garcia for 

assault and battery in violation of state law. 

On May 27, 2011, the Court issued an order granting in part and denying in part Plaintiff’s 

motion to compel. As part of that order, the Court directed Defendants to “provide any and all 

documents in Defendants’ personnel files of professional reprimands (including findings of policies 

and procedures violations, colleague complaints by other officers against Defendants, written findings 

and conclusions, and all documents relating to any review or evaluation of the job performance of 

each of the herein Defendants during his/her employment with CDCR, etc.) by supervisors of 

GEORGE H. ROBINSON,

 Plaintiff,

v.

D. G. ADAMS, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:08-cv-001380-AWI-BAM PC

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT JESSE 

MARTINEZ’S REQUEST TO SUPPLEMENT HIS 

RESPONSE TO THE COURT’S ORDER ISSUED 

MAY 27, 2011 (ECF No. 169)

Case 1:08-cv-01380-AWI-BAM Document 174 Filed 05/17/13 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

unnecessary use of excessive force while on the job.” (ECF No. 109, p. 19.) Defense counsel was 

directed to submit copies of such documents to the Court for in camera review. 

On April 12, 2013, defense counsel informed the Court that responses were submitted on 

behalf of Joe Martinez in June 2011. However, Joe Martinez is not a defendant in this action. Rather, 

the proper defendant is Jesse Martinez. Defendants now move to supplement Defendant Martinez’s 

response to the May 27, 2011 court order, and to strike any documents related to Joe Martinez from 

this action. Defendants request shall be granted. 

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED as follows:

1. Defendant Martinez is GRANTED leave to supplement his response to the Court’s May 27, 

2011 order; and

2. Any documents related to Joe Martinez, a non-party, are STRICKEN from the record. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 16, 2013 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE DEAC_Signature-END:

10c20kb8554

Case 1:08-cv-01380-AWI-BAM Document 174 Filed 05/17/13 Page 2 of 2