Kulas

MEMORANDUM **

Theodore C. Kulas, an Arizona state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment in favor of defendants following a bench trial on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and state negligence claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we vacate and remand.

Kulas contends that his trial was unfair because defendants denied him access to critical information during discovery. We agree. In order to prevail on appeal, Kulas must show that defendants’ failure to provide information during discovery resulted in actual and substantial prejudice, and that there is a reasonable possibility that additional discovery would have advanced his cause at trial. See Martel v. County of Los Angeles, 56 F.3d 993, 995 (9th Cir.1995) (en banc). Defendants did not provide Kulas with the name of a potential defendant (hearing officer Julie Roberts) until after the deadlines for conducting discovery and amending the complaint had passed. By that time, the court had already dismissed two of Kulas’s claims. Although Kulas did not move for permission to conduct additional discovery or to amend his complaint after defendants provided him with the name he sought, he made two…