Medina

I. BACKGROUND

25 A. Plaintiff’s Motion for Court-Appointed Medical Expert 26 On May 14, 2025, Plaintiff filed a motion for a court-appointed medical expert. (ECF 27 No. 120). Plaintiff argues that an expert should be appointed “to testify on the short- and long- 28 1 term effects of CN (chloroacetophenone) gas exposure, and the associated harm resulting from 2 Defendants Sgt. Medina’s failure to protect Plaintiff from such exposure.” (Id. at p. 1). 3 Plaintiff argues that the testimony is required to “clarify that a nurse’s observation does not 4 equate to medical expertise, especially when doctors have already diagnosed respiratory 5 damage, prescribed steroids, and treated Plaintiff for aggravated sleep apnea and chronic 6 inflammation.” (Id. at p. 3). 7 Plaintiff also argues that a court-appointed expert is necessary because “Deputy 8 Attorney General David E. Kuchinsky has demonstrated disregard for the Plaintiff’s medical 9 evidence.” (ECF No. 120, at p. 3). 10 B. Defendant Medina’s Opposition 11 In her opposition filed on May 28, 2025, Medina argues that Plaintiff seeks a court- 12 appointed expert for the improper reason of obtaining…