Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-06336/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-06336-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:12101 Americans with Disabilities Act

---

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ALTON E. FITZGERALD,

Plaintiff,

v.

ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:04-CV-6336-REC-LJO-P

ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL

NOTICE

(Doc. 17) 

Plaintiff Alton E. Fitzgerald (“plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On April 18, 2005, plaintiff filed

a request for judicial notice of all of his medical records maintained by CDC and all records

maintained by the Prison Law Office relating to complaints filed concerning medical treatment since

compliance with Plata v. Davis was mandated. 

“A judicially noticed fact must be one not subject to reasonable dispute in that it is either (1)

generally known within the territorial jurisdiction of the trial court or (2) capable of accurate and

ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned.” Fed. R.

Evid. 201(b). Plaintiff’s medical records in their entirety are not appropriate for judicial notice.

Compare Barnes v. Independent Auto. Dealers Ass’n of Health and Welfare Benefit Plan, 64 F.3d

1389, 1395 n.2 (9th Cir. 1995) (citing to Hines ex rel. Sevier v. Secretary of the Dep’t of Health &

Human Servs., 940 F.2d 1518, 1526 (Fed.Cir. 1991) (“Well-known medical facts are the types of

matters of which judicial notice may be taken.”)). Likewise, all of post-Plata medical complaints

///

Case 1:04-cv-06336-AWI-LJO Document 15 Filed 09/19/05 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

maintained by the Prison Law Office are not appropriate for judicial notice. Such documents are

clearly subject to reasonable dispute. 

Accordingly, plaintiff’s request for judicial notice, filed April 18, 2005, is HEREBY

DENIED.

 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 16, 2005 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill 

b9ed48 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-06336-AWI-LJO Document 15 Filed 09/19/05 Page 2 of 2