Baker

(PC) Candler v. Baker

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaSeptember 25, 20192:17-cv-01885California4,182 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 KEITH CANDLER, No. 2:17-cv-1885 AC P Plaintiff, v. ORDER BAKER, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. Currently before this court is plaintiff’s motion to compel, filed on February 8, 2019. See ECF No. 22. For the reasons listed below, the motion will be denied. I. RELEVANT FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Plaintiff alleges that he was sexually harassed in early June 2016, and that he filed a staff complaint on June 23, 2016 which accused defendant Baker of the harassment. See ECF No. 7 at 4, 12. Plaintiff alleges that defendants Baker, Gonzalez, Rashid, Whitehead and Marquez began to retaliate against him following his filing of the staff complaint. See id. at 4-9. Later, after 27 …

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.