Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_03-cv-00200/USCOURTS-cand-3_03-cv-00200-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
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

JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT AND PROPOSED ORDER: C 03-0200 VRW

Judith Z. Gold (Bar No. 97098)

Dale Rice (Bar No. 146249)

Aaron M. Armstrong (Bar No. 197301)

E-Mail: aaron.armstrong@hellerehrman.com

HELLER EHRMAN LLP

333 Bush Street

San Francisco, CA 94104-2878

Telephone: +1.415.772.6000

Facsimile: +1.415.772.6268

Attorneys for Plaintiff

THOMAS FLOYD BRISSETTE, SR.

BILL LOCKYER

Attorney General of the State of California

VIRGINIA I. PAPAN (Bar No. 143659)

Deputy Attorney General

E-Mail: gina.papan@doj.ca.gov

California Department of Justice

Office of the Attorney General

445 Golden Gate Avenue, Suite 11000

San Francisco, CA 94102

Telephone: (415) 703-5956

Facsimile: (415) 703-5843

Attorneys for Defendants

DWIGHT D. WINSLOW, M.D., 

and E. ALLEN, M.D.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

THOMAS FLOYD BRISSETTE, SR.,

Plaintiff,

v.

ALAMEIDA, ET AL.,

Defendants.

Case No.: C 03-0200 VRW

SUBSEQUENT JOINT CASE

MANAGEMENT STATEMENT

AND STIPULATED REQUEST FOR 

ORDER EXTENDING FACT

DISCOVERY CUT-OFF AND

CONTINUING CONFERENCE TO 

FEBRUARY 2006

Date: December 20, 2005

Time: 9:00 a.m.

Courtroom: 6

Trial Date: Not set.

The Honorable Vaughn R. Walker

The parties to the above -entitled action jointly submit this Subsequent Case 

Management Statement and Stipulation requesting an order extending the fact discovery 

cut-off by approximately two months, from December 29, 2005 to February 28, 2006, and 

continuing the upcoming conference from December 20, 2005 to late-February 2006.

Although the parties have completed most of their fact discovery, recent events 

Case 3:03-cv-00200-VRW Document 74 Filed 12/13/05 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

2

JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT AND PROPOSED ORDER: C 03-0200 VRW

beyond the parties’ control (Plaintiff’s serious illness and a witness’s military commitment) 

have delayed the scheduling of two vital depositions. Additionally, the medical staff at 

Pelican Bay State Prison has scheduled a sleep study for Plaintiff on December 12, 2005, 

for purposes of evaluating his alleged narcolepsy condition. Since the central issue in the 

case concerns Defendants’ alleged failure to provide narcolepsy medication to Plaintiff, the 

parties believe outstanding fact discovery should be postponed pending the results of the 

sleep study. That testing may also necessitate the deposition of the non-party doctor who 

renders the diagnosis.

I. BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL STATUS

A. Case Overview

This is a prisoner’s civil rights action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, in which 

Plaintiff alleges deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs. In particular, Plaintiff 

claims that he suffers from narcolepsy, and that Defendants unjustifiably have prevented 

Plaintiff from receiving medication (or other treatment) for the condition since August 

2000. Defendants deny liability on the grounds that Plaintiff’s narcolepsy diagnosis is 

questionable.

B. Fact Discovery Completed To Date

Pursuant to case management deadlines previously set by the Court, the parties 

exchanged initial disclosures on August 12, 2005, and in September 2005, completed the 

depositions of both Defendants (Drs. Allen and Winslow) and Dr. Douglas. Defendants 

have also responded to Plaintiff’s document requests, interrogatories and requests for 

admissions, and have produced approximately 2,000 pages of responsive materials, 

including Plaintiff’s prison health records.1

1

 In order to avoid the need for additional depositions and possible trial witnesses, 

Defendants have agreed to provide an authenticating declaration from the custodian of 

records for Plaintiff’s prison medical file (“Unit Health Record”), and to stipulate to the 

authenticity of those records for purposes of trial.

Case 3:03-cv-00200-VRW Document 74 Filed 12/13/05 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

3

JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT AND PROPOSED ORDER: C 03-0200 VRW

II. EVENTS NECESSITATING ADDITIONAL TIME FOR FACT DISCOVERY

A. Plaintiff’s Recent Lymphoma Diagnosis And Ongoing Chemotherapy 

Treatments.

Although the parties had originally scheduled Plaintiff’s deposition for September 

16, 2005, Plaintiff was diagnosed with a serious form of “B-type” lymphoma a few weeks 

before his deposition. Since that time, Plaintiff has been receiving ongoing chemotherapy 

treatments at a cancer treatment center in Eureka. It is difficult to reschedule Plaintiff’s 

deposition without disrupting his current treatment plan, and because his ability to testify on 

any particular day is unpredictable due to the side effects of the chemotherapy treatments.

Accordingly, the parties need to postpone Plaintiff’s deposition until his current round of 

chemotherapy treatments ends, and counsel can be relatively certain that Plaintiff will be at 

the prison and not sick on the date selected.

B. The Pelican Bay Medical Staff’s Decision To Perform A Sleep Study.

Prison medical staff recently made arrangements for Plaintiff to undergo a sleep 

study on December 12, 2005, to determine whether he has narcolepsy. The results of that 

testing may help to resolve this litigation. Thus, the parties believe further fact discovery 

should be postponed until the test results are available. In addition, Plaintiff has not had any 

input on the selection of the sleep study provider, or the type of testing that will be 

administered. Accordingly, the parties agree that Plaintiff should have an opportunity to 

depose the doctor who oversees the sleep study and makes the diagnosis, if Plaintiff so 

desires after reviewing the test results.

C. Deposition of Dr. Samuel Ruben

The parties had also scheduled the deposition of Dr. Ruben during the week of 

September 12, 2005, but Dr. Ruben was unavailable because he was called up for National 

Guard duty and sent to Louisiana to assist in Hurricane Katrina relief efforts. Although Dr. 

Ruben has since returned, the parties believe his deposition should also be postponed 

pending the results of Plaintiff’s sleep study and the rescheduling of Plaintiff’s deposition.

Case 3:03-cv-00200-VRW Document 74 Filed 12/13/05 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

4

JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT AND PROPOSED ORDER: C 03-0200 VRW

That would allow the parties to set both depositions for the same week in Crescent City.2

D. ADR

The parties may be willing to participate in mediation before a federal Magistrate 

Judge following review of the sleep study results and completion of the discovery described 

above.

December 6, 2005 Respectfully submitted,

HELLER EHRMAN LLP

By ______________/s/__________________

AARON M. ARMSTRONG

Attorneys for Plaintiff

THOMAS FLOYD BRISSETTE, SR.

BILL LOCKYER, CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY 

GENERAL

By ______________/s/__________________

VIRGINIA I. PAPAN

Deputy Attorney General

Attorneys for Defendants

DWIGHT D. WINSLOW, M.D., 

and E. ALLEN, M.D.

2

 Dr. Ruben is an important witness because Defendants allege that he was involved 

in the decision to discontinue Plaintiff’s narcolepsy medication.

Case 3:03-cv-00200-VRW Document 74 Filed 12/13/05 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

5

JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT AND PROPOSED ORDER: C 03-0200 VRW

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

For the foregoing reasons, the parties hereby stipulate as follows:

1. The fact discovery cut-off is extended to February 28, 2006.

2. The further case management conference currently set for December 20, 

2005, is continued to a date to be determined by the Court in late-February 2006.

SO AGREED.

December 6, 2005 HELLER EHRMAN LLP

By ______________/s/__________________

AARON M. ARMSTRONG

Attorneys for Plaintiff BRISSETTE

December 6, 2005

BILL LOCKYER, CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY 

GENERAL

By ______________/s/__________________

VIRGINIA I. PAPAN

Deputy Attorney General

Attorneys for Defendants ALLEN and WINSLOW

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

The fact discovery cut-off is extended to February 28, 2006. The Subsequent Case 

Management Conference set for December 20, 2005, is continued to ________________.

DATED: __________________

_______________________________________

The Honorable Vaughn R. Walker

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2/28/06 AT 9:00 a.m.

December 13, 2005

U

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Judge Vaughn R Walker

Case 3:03-cv-00200-VRW Document 74 Filed 12/13/05 Page 5 of 5