Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-02554/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-02554-22/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GREGORY LYNN NORWOOD,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-03-2554 GEB GGH P

vs.

EDWARD ALAMEIDA, Jr., et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

The pretrial order was filed on July 13, 2007. Defendants filed no objections, but

plaintiff has filed objections to the pretrial order, which the undersigned has reviewed. Plaintiff

objects to his proposed Exhibit 26, copies of inmate time cards of his work attendance at CSPSac, having been stricken in the pretrial order. Plaintiff avers that he needs this exhibit to show

he is deemed to be a “black non-affiliated inmate.” Plaintiff will be permitted to present the

work attendance time cards, but the exhibit will be numbered as plaintiff’s Exhibit 28. Plaintiff

also objects to the striking of his proposed Exhibit 27, his disciplinary report for refusing to go to

his cell and his 602 grievance complaining of inadequate ventilation and lack of cool air in the Bfacility cells, which plaintiff claims to need to demonstrate that faulty ventilation could occur

while inmates were on lockdown when inmates would just have to suffer because they could not

refuse to lock up. The court will permit plaintiff to present his disciplinary report and 602

Case 2:03-cv-02554-GEB -GGH Document 129 Filed 08/29/07 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

grievance as plaintiff’s Exhibit 29 (not 27). The court also directs, for continuity, that to the

extent that plaintiff may present a taped televised interview of defendant Willey, deemed in the

pretrial order to be Exhibit 32, that it instead be numbered as plaintiff’s Exhibit 30 at trial.

In the pretrial order, plaintiff was informed that a writ of habeas corpus ad

testificandum would issue for inmate Tatum to appear as a witness for plaintiff either via

videoconferencing or in person at trial. Plaintiff insists that inmate Tatum should appear in

person at trial. At the trial confirmation hearing, plaintiff may address the request regarding 

inmate Tatum’s in-person appearance at trial to Judge England. 

All other objections to the pretrial order raised by plaintiff, regarding, inter alia,

the need for additional inmate witnesses or exhibits, are overruled. This order is deemed to be a

modification of, and supplement to, the pretrial order. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: 8/28/07 /s/ Gregory G. Hollows

GREGORY G. HOLLOWS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

GGH:009

norw2554.sup

Case 2:03-cv-02554-GEB -GGH Document 129 Filed 08/29/07 Page 2 of 2