Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-00107/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-00107-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ALFREDO GONZALEZ,

Plaintiff,

 v

P J DENT,

Defendant.

 /

No C 04-0107 VRW

AMENDED ORDER

On July 25, 2007, this matter came on for hearing on

plaintiff’s motion to compel responses to subpoenas served on third

party California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation

(“CDCR”). Doc #127. The court also heard argument on CDCR’s

motion to quash those same subpoenas, Doc ##167, 177, and on

Defendant P J Dent’s motion to quash those subpoenas insofar as

they seek information from his personnel file. Doc #131. The

court found that the subpoenas were overbroad and directed counsel

for the parties and counsel for CDCR to meet and confer in an

effort to narrow the requests. Doc #186. The court further

directed the parties to report to the court on their efforts by

Case 3:04-cv-00107-VRW Document 190 Filed 08/15/07 Page 1 of 4
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

joint letter. Id. The court is in receipt of a letter, dated

August 6, 2007 and signed on behalf of all parties, enumerating

plaintiff’s narrowed requests as well as the remaining objections

of Dent and CDCR. Doc #187.

The court finds that plaintiff’s requests remain

overbroad. The only issues for trial are those described in

section B 2 of the court’s summary judgment order. Doc #99 at 11-

16. Accordingly, the court rules on the remaining objections as

follows:

1. Plaintiff’s Narrowed Request No 1

Plaintiff seeks documents “related to job performance,

training, bias and honesty” of Dent. Dent agrees to the production

of several categories of documents, which the court will not repeat

here. Dent objects, however, to production of “documents

reflecting an investigator’s opinions as to whether defendant did

or did not use excessive force, did or did not retaliate or was or

was not honest.” Dent’s objection is SUSTAINED. Such documents

are protected by the work product doctrine. FRCP 26(b)(3). 

Moreover, prior incidents are, of course, not admissible to show a

propensity on the part of the defendant officer to behave in a

manner which allows him to use unnecessary force on an inmate. See

FRE 404(b).

CDCR agreed to provide, under a protective order, the

names, addresses and telephone numbers of all witnesses,

investigators and other persons involved with responsive documents. 

The court is satisfied that CDCR’s offer fulfills its obligations

in regards to plaintiff’s request.

Case 3:04-cv-00107-VRW Document 190 Filed 08/15/07 Page 2 of 4
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

3

2. Plaintiff’s Narrowed Request No 2

Plaintiff seeks “documents related to the job

performance, bias and honesty of percipient witness correctional

officers.” The court DENIES this request in its entirety. Claims

against correctional officers other than Dent have been eliminated

from the case. See Doc #99 at 16 n1.

3. Plaintiff’s Narrowed Request No 3

Plaintiff seeks “documents related to the competence and

honesty of treating medical personnel.” The court DENIES this

request in its entirety. Claims against medical personnel are no

longer in this case. See Doc #99 at 16-18.

4. Plaintiff’s Narrowed Requests Nos 4 and 6

Plaintiff seeks various “policy and procedure” documents

including those relating to transportation of inmates between

prisons, inmate segregation by gang affiliation or race, use of

force policies and methods used to control or restrain inmates. 

Plaintiff also seeks documents related to the transportation of

plaintiff to SVSP, such as the names of inmates on the bus and the

bus log. Dent takes no position with regard to these requests. 

CDCR agrees to produce policy, procedure and training documents

pertaining to use of force on inmates, interaction with inmates

following filing of a grievance and investigation of use of force

complaints. CDCR objects that any further discovery is “not

relevant to this excessive force case and is too remote to the

issue to be subject to discovery.” The court agrees. Plaintiff’s

Case 3:04-cv-00107-VRW Document 190 Filed 08/15/07 Page 3 of 4
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

4

claim that he was somehow “set up” to encounter a rival gang member

has been eliminated. See Doc #99 at 8-11. 

5. Plaintiff’s Narrowed Request No 5

Plaintiff seeks documents relating to the January 24,

2002 incident including investigations as well as reports and

documents relating to the staffing of personnel involved in

transportation of inmates between prisons, processing of inmates

and provision of medical care. Dent objects to production of

documents reflecting an investigator’s opinions whether Dent did or

did not use excessive force. Dent’s objection is SUSTAINED for

reasons discussed above. CDCR maintains that discovery should be

limited to plaintiff’s grievances associated with the January 24,

2002 incident. The court agrees. The issues for trial relate

solely to the excessive force allegedly used against plaintiff by

Dent. 

Accordingly, for reasons given above, the remaining

objections raised by Dent and CDCR are SUSTAINED. Furthermore,

appointed counsel is ORDERED to appoint one, but only one, lawyer

to conduct all work in the representation of plaintiff.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 

VAUGHN R WALKER

United States District Chief Judge

Case 3:04-cv-00107-VRW Document 190 Filed 08/15/07 Page 4 of 4