From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bruce v. Cate

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Nov 22, 2011
No C-09-4649 JW (PR) (N.D. Cal. Nov. 22, 2011)

Summary

In Bruce v. Cate, No. 09-4649 JW (N.D. Cal.), the breach of settlement claim was not actually litigated, and the determination of the breach of settlement claim was not a necessary or critical part of the judgment.

Summary of this case from Bruce v. Ylst

Opinion

No C-09-4649 JW (PR)

11-22-2011

VINCENT BRUCE, Plaintiff, v. MATTHEW CATE, Warden, et al, Defendant(s).


ORDER REQUIRING DEFENDANTS TO SUPPLEMENT RECORD

Plaintiff has filed a civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging that various Pelican Bay State Prison officials violated his constitutional rights. Defendants have filed a motion for summary judgment (Doc. No. 19), and plaintiff has filed a cross-motion for partial summary judgment (Doc. No. 53). Plaintiff's allegations against defendants concern, in part, his validation as an associate of a prison gang. Before the Court will issue a ruling on the pending summary judgment motions, the Court orders defendants to supplement the record with the following documents by no later than November 30, 2011:

(1) Copies of the six source items referred to in the December 20, 2007 Validation Memorandum of Bruce, Vincent, J84086 (including the supporting
documents/communication); and
(2) Copies of the communications, letters, interviews, and other supporting documents which form the basis of the confidential memorandums which served as principal source items or supporting source items. These documents may be filed under seal.

The Valdiation Memorandum is attached as Exhibit B to the Turmezei Declaration filed in support of defendants' motion for summary judgment (Doc. No. 21).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

JAMES WARE

United States District Chief Judge

G:\PRO-SE\JW-SF\CR-09\Bruce-09-4649-ordering defendants to supplement record.wpd

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

VINCENT BRUCE, Plaintiff(s),

v.

MATTHEW CATE, Defendant(s).

No. C09-4649 (JW)

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California.

That on November 23, 2011, I SERVED a true and correct copy of the attached, by placing said copy in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) listed below, by depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail; or by placing said copy into an inter-office delivery receptacle located in the Office of the Clerk.

Vincent C. Bruce

J84086

Pelican Bay State Prison

D6-101

P.O. Box 7500

Crescent City, CA 95532

RICHARD W. WIEKING, CLERK

By: _____________

Susan Imbriani, Courtroom Deputy


Summaries of

Bruce v. Cate

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Nov 22, 2011
No C-09-4649 JW (PR) (N.D. Cal. Nov. 22, 2011)

In Bruce v. Cate, No. 09-4649 JW (N.D. Cal.), the breach of settlement claim was not actually litigated, and the determination of the breach of settlement claim was not a necessary or critical part of the judgment.

Summary of this case from Bruce v. Ylst
Case details for

Bruce v. Cate

Case Details

Full title:VINCENT BRUCE, Plaintiff, v. MATTHEW CATE, Warden, et al, Defendant(s).

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Nov 22, 2011

Citations

No C-09-4649 JW (PR) (N.D. Cal. Nov. 22, 2011)

Citing Cases

Bruce v. Ylst

(Doc. No. 230, Ex. A at ¶ 6.) In 2007, plaintiff was revalidated as a associate of the Black Guerilla Family…

Bruce v. Ylst

In 2007, plaintiff was revalidated as an associate of the Black Guerilla Family prison gang. Plaintiff…