Newsom
(PC) Coleman v. Newsom
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 RALPH COLEMAN, et al., No. 2:90-cv-0520 KJM DB Plaintiffs, ORDER v. GAVIN NEWSOM, et al., 1S Defendants. 16 More than five years ago, the court gave defendants one year to “take all steps necessary 18 to come into complete compliance with the staffing ratios in their 2009 Staffing Plan and the maximum ten percent vacancy rate required by the court’s June 13, 2002 order.” October 10, 2017 Order, ECF No. 5711, at 30. Defendants did not come into compliance within the one year deadline and remain out of compliance. In an effort to effect compliance, the court has ordered 22 fines to begin accumulating. See February 28, 2023 Order, ECF No. 7742, at 5-7. The court 23 directed defendants to report on the accumulation of monthly fines for vacant mental health staff 24 positions in monthly staff vacancy reports, beginning with the report due on March 31, 2023. /d. The court had not previously…