Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_90-cv-00520/USCOURTS-caed-2_90-cv-00520-1342/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

[4507432.8] 1 

JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER IN RESPONSE TO MAY 20, 2024 ORDER (ECF NO. 8243) 

DONALD SPECTER – 083925 

STEVEN FAMA – 099641 

MARGOT MENDELSON – 268583 

PRISON LAW OFFICE 

1917 Fifth Street 

Berkeley, California 94710-1916 

Telephone: (510) 280-2621 

CLAUDIA CENTER – 158255 

DISABILITY RIGHTS EDUCATION 

AND DEFENSE FUND, INC. 

Ed Roberts Campus 

3075 Adeline Street, Suite 210 

Berkeley, California 94703-2578 

Telephone: (510) 644-2555

MICHAEL W. BIEN – 096891 

ERNEST GALVAN – 196065 

LISA ELLS – 243657 

JENNY S. YELIN – 273601 

THOMAS NOLAN – 169692 

MARC J. SHINN-KRANTZ – 312968 

ROSEN BIEN 

GALVAN & GRUNFELD LLP 

101 Mission Street, Sixth Floor 

San Francisco, California 94105-1738 

Telephone: (415) 433-6830 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

RALPH COLEMAN, et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

GAVIN NEWSOM, et al., 

Defendants. 

 Case No. 2:90-CV-00520-KJM-DB 

JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER 

IN RESPONSE TO MAY 20, 2024 

ORDER (ECF NO. 8243)

Judge: Hon. Kimberly J. Mueller 

Case 2:90-cv-00520-KJM-SCR Document 8267 Filed 06/11/24 Page 1 of 5
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

[4507432.8] 1 

JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER IN RESPONSE TO MAY 20, 2024 ORDER (ECF NO. 8243) 

On May 20, 2024, the Court ordered the parties to file within fourteen days any 

motions to modify or enforce the Court’s previous orders in connection with disputed 

Restrictive Housing Unit (“RHU”) regulations and policies, and/or to file a stipulated 

request to modify this Court’s previous orders to the extent necessary to conform those 

orders to specific RHU regulations and policies. See Order ECF No. 8243 at 6. 

The parties have met and conferred and agreed to further modifications to 

Defendants’ draft RHU Mental Health Policy. The agreed-upon revision of the RHU 

Mental Health Policy is attached hereto as Attachment A. 

The parties have two remaining potential disputes regarding the regulations, related 

to two current exceptions to the transfer timelines for EOP and CCCMS patients—the 

exception for medical holds, see Cal Code Regs. Tit. 15 §§ 3335.2(d)(1)(A) [EOP]; 

3335.3(d)(1)(A) [CCCMS], and the exception for patient refusals to transfer, see Cal Code 

Regs. Tit. 15 §§ 3335.2(d)(1)(B) [EOP]; 3335.3(d)(1)(B) [CCCMS]; 3335.4(c)(1)(B) [GPRHU in Desert Institutions]. 

The parties are optimistic that they can resolve both potential disputes by 

negotiating language regarding medical holds based on the Court’s resolution of the related 

medical hold issue in the context of transfers to CCCMS and EOP, see ECF No. 8216 

(Joint Response), ECF No. 8206 (April 18, 2024 Order), and negotiating language 

regarding patient refusals to transfer. Assuming the parties reach agreement, Defendants 

would issue a policy consistent with their agreement. 

The parties agree that the previously stipulated and ordered medical hold transfer 

timeframe exception and reporting obligations for desert institutions remains controlling in 

circumstances where patients are either in a desert institution RHU when they are referred 

to the MHSDS or are erroneously transferred to a desert institution RHU when they are 

already EOP or CCCMS. See September 26, 2019 Order, ECF No. 6296 at 6-7 (desert 

transfer medical hold exception); May 18, 2020 Order, ECF No. 6678 (reporting 

obligations). The parties shall interpret Cal. Code Regs. Tit. §§ 3335.4(c)(1)(A) [GPRHU] consistent with this Court’s prior orders. The parties intend to negotiate language 

Case 2:90-cv-00520-KJM-SCR Document 8267 Filed 06/11/24 Page 2 of 5
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

[4507432.8] 2 

JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER IN RESPONSE TO MAY 20, 2024 ORDER (ECF NO. 8243) 

for a patient transfer refusal exception in this context. 

I. STIPULATION 

1. The parties shall meet and confer regarding the RHU medical hold exception 

for a period of 30 days from the date the Court resolves the related pending dispute 

regarding medical holds for CCCMS and EOP transfers with an intention to submit a 

stipulation and proposed order. See ECF No. 8216 (Joint Response); ECF No. 8206 

(April 18, 2024 Order). If the parties cannot reach an agreement, they will inform the 

Court, and propose to file a joint report regarding their respective positions for resolution 

by the Court. 

2. The parties shall meet and confer regarding the patient refusal to transfer 

timeline exception. The parties shall file a joint stipulation and proposed order regarding 

any agreement by July 3, 2024. In the absence of an agreement, the parties shall brief this 

issue in the joint report discussed in paragraph 1. 

3. Upon resolution of the potential disputes discussed in paragraphs 1 and 2, the 

parties will request that the Court order that the RHU Mental Health Policy replace the 

following sections of the 2021 Program Guide Update: Chapters 7-9 (ASU, SHU, PSU) 

and the memoranda and policies on the Short Term Restrictive Housing (STRH) and Long 

Term Restrictive Housing (LTRH). ECF No. 7333-1 at 126-167, 443-459, 469-471. 

4. Subject to resolution of the potential disputes discussed in paragraphs 1 and 

2, the parties also agree that the RHU regulations update certain aspects of the 2021 

Compendium of Custody Related Remedial Measures and request that the Court approve 

the updated Compendium. See ECF No. 7333-2. A copy of the updated Compendium that 

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

Case 2:90-cv-00520-KJM-SCR Document 8267 Filed 06/11/24 Page 3 of 5
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

[4507432.8] 3

JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER IN RESPONSE TO MAY 20, 2024 ORDER (ECF NO. 8243) 

reflects changes made by the RHU regulations, but not other changes since the filing of the 

2021 Compendium Update, is attached hereto as Attachment B. 

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

DATED: June 3, 2024 Respectfully submitted, 

ROSEN BIEN GALVAN & GRUNFELD LLP 

By: /s/ Marc J. Shinn-Krantz 

 Marc J. Shinn-Krantz 

 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

DATED: June 3, 2024 HANSON BRIDGETT LLP 

By: /s/ Paul B. Mello 

 Paul B. Mello 

 Attorneys for Defendants 

DATED: June 3, 2024 ROB BONTA, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF 

CALIFORNIA 

By: /s/ Elise Owens Thorn 

 Elise Owens Thorn 

 Attorneys for Defendants 

ORDER 

The court has reviewed the parties’ stipulation. Consistent with the court’s May 20, 

2024 order, ECF No. 8243, if the parties do not reach agreement on the dispute set out in 

paragraph 1 of the stipulation the dispute shall be presented to the court in the form of 

either a motion to modify or a motion to enforce an existing court order. If the parties do 

not reach agreement on the dispute set out in paragraph 2 of the stipulation that dispute 

Case 2:90-cv-00520-KJM-SCR Document 8267 Filed 06/11/24 Page 4 of 5
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

[4507432.8] 4 

JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER IN RESPONSE TO MAY 20, 2024 ORDER (ECF NO. 8243) 

shall also be presented to the court by an appropriate motion brought in accordance with 

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules of this Court. Such motion(s) 

shall be filed in lieu of the joint statement proposed by the parties’ stipulation. This order 

constitutes authorization to file such motions as necessary. In all other respects, the 

parties’ stipulation is approved. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: June 11, 2024. 

 

Case 2:90-cv-00520-KJM-SCR Document 8267 Filed 06/11/24 Page 5 of 5