Rosario

(PC) Marti v. Rosario

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJune 7, 20212:20-cv-00897California893 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ALEX LAMOTA MARTI, No. 2:20-cv-00897-CKD P Plaintiff, v. ORDER ANTHONY ROSARIO, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Currently pending before the court is plaintiff’s motion to compel the preservation of evidence. ECF No. 28. In light of the parties’ stipulation to amend the discovery and scheduling order governing this case, the court will deny plaintiff’s motion without prejudice for the reasons outlined below. I. Factual and Procedural History This case is proceeding on Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference claims against defendants Rosario, Brown, Vanni, Altschuler, and Kassis; an Eighth Amendment failure to protect claim against defendants Rosario and Brown; a First Amendment retaliation claim against defendants Rosario, Brown, and Vanni; and supplemental state law tort claims…

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.