Opinion
20-cv-2100-GPC
11-08-2021
BRIAN THOMAS MATHEIS, Plaintiff, v. CDCR et al., Defendants.
ORDER CLARIFYING SCHEDULING ORDER AND ORDER FOR STATUS REPORTS
HON. GONZALO P. CURIEL UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
On September 20, 2021, Plaintiff Brian Thomas Matheis (“Plaintiff”) filed her second Motion for Temporary Restraining Order. ECF No. 51. After the parties briefed the matter, this Court held a motion hearing on October 15, 2021. Following the hearing, the Court issued a scheduling order and order relating to status reports. ECF No. 61 (“Status Report Order”). On November 2, 2021, Defendants filed a Motion for Reconsideration of ECF No. 61. ECF No. 64. The Court now issues this Order for the purpose of clarifying its previous Order and providing the parties with further guidance.
I. DISCUSSION
Defendants move this Court to reconsider its Status Report Order because Defendants interpret that Order as “compelling specific further investigation by Defense 1 counsel into Matheis’ claims.” ECF No. 64 at 2. Defendants argue that an order compelling Defendants to carry out such an investigation would place Defense counsel “in a conflicting position between its duty to investigate and its position of advocacy.” Id. Defendant’s Motion also states that Plaintiff’s grievances against Inmate Harrison and Officer Strayhorn were each “independently assigned to the Allegation Inquiry Management Section (AIMS), an independent unit in CDCR specially established to investigate inmate allegations of staff misconduct, for further inquiry,” and that these two investigations have confidential preliminary report due dates of October 29, 2021, and November 20, 2021, respectively. Id. at 6.
The Court now clarifies that its Status Report Order did not direct Defendants to initiate and carry out an independent investigation of Plaintiff’s claims. Instead, the Order specifically stated Defendants were “directed to submit a report to the Court on or before November 19, 2021 detailing the results of any follow-up investigations into the statements of inmate declarants in support of Plaintiff’s Motion for Temporary Restraining Order (ECF No. 51” and that Defendants were “authorized to take five further depositions” in order to “effectuate this follow-up.” ECF No. 61 at 2 (emphasis added). The phrase “any follow-up investigations” does not compel Defense counsel to conduct such investigation herself, but rather is aimed at providing the Court with more information as to what, if any, investigations are ongoing. Relatedly, an authorization to take further depositions is not a directive compelling Defendants to do so. Contrary to Defendant’s assertion, the Court’s Order did not create “an obligation to interfere with an ongoing internal investigation.” ECF No. 64 at 11.
II. CONCLUSION
Now that the Court has more information on the AIMS investigations and their anticipated timelines, the Court clarifies that Defendants should provide the Court with a status update and any results of the two AIMS investigations for in-camera review by 2 November 24, 2021. Defendants must provide Plaintiff with a copy of the same by November 24, 2021. Defendants shall also provide Plaintiff with a copy of any available overhead camera or body camera footage relating to the two incidents involving inmate Harrison and Officer Strayhorn, as well as a method for reviewing such footage, by November 19, 2021. Plaintiffs time to file a response is extended to December 6, 2021. In this response, Plaintiff should indicate to the Court whether Plaintiff has any objection to the Court receiving and reviewing a copy of the footage as well. This Court having clarified its previous Order, Defendants’ Motion for Reconsideration is DENIED AS MOOT.
A telephonic hearing on this matter remains scheduled for December 17, 2021 at 1:30 PM. For the telephonic hearing, counsel and the public may dial (877) 848-7030, Access Code: 7030611. The Court ORDERS Defendants to reach out to the respective litigation coordinator(s) to set and facilitate the telephonic hearing scheduled for December 17, 2021, at 1:30 PM. Specifically, the Court DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to send this hearing notice to the Office of Legal Affairs for the CDCR, and ORDERS Defendants to contact the litigation coordinator at RJDCF so that the litigation coordinator can arrange for Plaintiff to participate at the telephonic hearing.
IT IS SO ORDERED. 3