Quiring

(PC) Casteneda v. Quiring

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaDecember 21, 20232:21-cv-02196California894 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 LORENZO CASTENEDA, No. 2:21-cv-2196 DAD KJN P Plaintiff, v. ORDER J.QUIRING, et al., Defendants. 16 On November 13, 2023, plaintiff filed a document entitled “Motion to Compel Production of Documents.” Plaintiff seeks production of two grievance forms he claims raise issues similar to those alleged herein. Defendants oppose the motion noting that the two grievances do not raise issues similar to those alleged herein and offer to submit the grievances for in camera review. As discussed below, plaintiff’s motion to compel is denied. Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint Plaintiff, under the EOP level of mental health care, alleges that on two separate occasions in April of 2021, defendants J. Quiring, K. McTaggart, J. Rowe, and S. Medina conspired to violate plaintiff’s Eighth and First Amendment rights by handcuffing plaintiff’s hands extremely tight behind his back and placing him in a small stand up cage with no…

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.