Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-00653/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-00653-25/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ALEX LAMOTA MARTI,

Plaintiff,

v.

M. A. BAIRES, et al.,

Defendants.

_____________________________________/

Case No. 1:08-cv-00653-AWI-SKO (PC)

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR COURT 

ORDER AND REQUESTING CDCR AND 

CSATF’S COUNSEL CONTACT MCSP

(Doc. 106)

Plaintiff Alex Lamota Marti, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed 

this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on May 9, 2008. This action is proceeding on 

Plaintiff’s amended complaint against Defendants Baires, Garza, and Knight for retaliation, in 

violation of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. (Docs. 12, 13.) 

On December 6, 2013, Plaintiff filed a motion seeking an order requiring Mule Creek State 

Prison mail room staff to serve documents on Deputy Attorney General Krista Pollard, who 

represents third parties the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (“CDCR”)

and the California Substances Abuse Treatment Facility and State Prison (“CSATF”), and Mark 

Harris, who represents Defendants. It appears from Plaintiff’s explanation that he is encountering 

difficulty with staff not recognizing his entitlement to meaningful access to the courts with respect 

to mailing documents to opposing counsel, as an indigent inmate.

The Court does not have jurisdiction over prison officials at Mule Creek State Prison and it 

cannot issue the order Plaintiff seeks. E.g., Summers v. Earth Island Institute, 555 U.S. 488, 493, 

Case 1:08-cv-00653-AWI-SKO Document 113 Filed 05/01/14 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

129 S.Ct. 1142, 1149 (2009); Mayfield v. United States, 599 F.3d 964, 969 (9th Cir. 2010). 

However, the state is required to ensure inmates have meaningful access to the courts, and an 

inmate’s constitutional right to litigate civil rights cases such as this encompasses both a right to 

affirmative assistance and a right to litigate without undue interference. Silva v. Di Vittorio, 658 

F.3d 1090, 1101-02 (9th Cir. 2011). To that end, although the Court lacks jurisdiction to issue the 

order Plaintiff seeks, the Court requests that Ms. Pollard, as an officer of the court, contact the 

litigation office at Mule Creek State Prison in an effort to ensure that proper procedures are 

understood and are being followed with respect to Plaintiff’s need to serve documents on counsel 

in this case.1

Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s motion for an order requiring prison staff to serve counsel is DENIED 

based on lack of jurisdiction; and

2. Deputy Attorney General Krista Pollard is requested to contact the litigation office 

at Mule Creek State Prison in an effort to resolve any potential misunderstanding regarding 

Plaintiff’s need to serve documents on counsel for Defendants and counsel for CDCR and CSATF.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 1, 2014 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

 

1 The Court expresses no opinion on what procedures are in effect or whether they are being followed, and the Court 

does not require a status report.

Case 1:08-cv-00653-AWI-SKO Document 113 Filed 05/01/14 Page 2 of 2