Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_90-cv-00520/USCOURTS-caed-2_90-cv-00520-660/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 COURTS

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

AND THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT COMPOSED OF THREE JUDGES

PURSUANT TO SECTION 2284, TITLE 28 UNITED STATES CODE

RALPH COLEMAN, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

EDMUND G. BROWN JR., et al.,

Defendants.

NO. 2:90-cv-0520 LKK DAD (PC)

THREE-JUDGE COURT

MARCIANO PLATA, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

EDMUND G. BROWN JR., et al.,

Defendants.

NO. C01-1351 TEH

THREE-JUDGE COURT

ORDER TO FILE PROPOSED

ORDERS RE: DEFENDANTS’

REQUEST TO EXTEND

POPULATION REDUCTION

DEADLINE

This Court has repeatedly extended the meet-and-confer process, and by virtue thereof

the date for the State’s compliance, in hopes that the parties could reach agreement on how

this Court can best ensure a durable solution to the prison population problem as required by

our orders of August 4, 2009, June 30, 2011, and June 20, 2013. It now appears that no such

agreement will be reached, and the Court therefore intends to issue an order within the next

30 days as to whether it will grant, deny, or grant in part and deny in part the State’s request

for an extension of time in which to comply with those orders. Because, as a result of the

recent process in which the parties have engaged, they may have modified their views as to

the appropriate content of the order to be issued by this Court, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED

that, on or before January 23, 2014, plaintiffs and defendants shall each file proposed orders

Case 2:90-cv-00520-KJM-SCR Document 4978 Filed 01/13/14 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

for this Court to consider as it determines how to rule on the pending request. These

proposed orders shall not be statements of the parties’ ultimate wishes but, rather, shall

include those terms, and only those terms, that the parties believe are best suited to achieve

durable compliance with this Court’s orders to maintain a prison population of no more than

137.5% design capacity. Either plaintiffs or defendants may, at their option, not later than

January 28, 2014, file comments on or objections to the proposed order submitted by their

opponents of not more than seven pages.

The current April 18, 2014 deadline for compliance with our orders is hereby

extended by the time between the date of this order and the date of the order ruling on

defendants’ request for extension.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 01/13/14 

STEPHEN REINHARDT

UNITED STATES CIRCUIT JUDGE

NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS

Dated: 01/13/14 

LAWRENCE K. KARLTON

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Dated: 01/13/14 

THELTON E. HENDERSON

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 2:90-cv-00520-KJM-SCR Document 4978 Filed 01/13/14 Page 2 of 2