United States District Court, E.D. California
ABEL P. REYES, Plaintiff,
M. FLORES, Defendant.
FINAL PRETRIAL ORDER
August 13, 2019, the court conducted a final pretrial
conference. Plaintiff Abel Reyes (“plaintiff”)
appeared telephonically and pro se. Deputy Attorney
General Matthew Roman appeared telephonically as counsel for
defendant M. Flores, LVN (“defendant”). Having
considered the plaintiff’s objections, the court issues
this final pretrial order.
is a state prisoner proceeding in forma pauperis in
this civil rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §
1983. Plaintiff claims that defendant knowingly denied him
constitutionally adequate medical treatment and was
deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs in
violation of the Eighth Amendment.
is predicated on 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1343.
Jurisdiction is not contested.
is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391. Venue is not
parties have demanded a jury trial. The jury will consist of
January 2014, plaintiff was incarcerated at California State
Following a history of treatment for various urinary
symptoms, the plaintiff was admitted into the Delano Regional
Medical Center for transurethral resection of the prostate
(“TURP”) surgery on January 21, 2014.
Plaintiff was discharged and returned to CSP-Corcoran on
January 23, 2014.
January 26, 2014, at approximately 7:00 a.m., plaintiff was
pushed in his wheelchair to the C window of the 3-B Clinic to
obtain his morning medications. Plaintiff told defendant that
he was in severe pain and that he had a medical emergency.
Defendant stated that it was not a medical emergency and told
plaintiff to submit a health care services request form to be
approximately 11:30 a.m., plaintiff returned to the 3-B
Clinic where he was seen by defendant. Plaintiff told
defendant of his continuing pain, and that he was unable to
urinate, had thick blood clots come out of his penis, and
that he had just had surgery and needed medical attention.
Defendant assessed plaintiff and concluded that he did not
need immediate medical attention.
approximately 3:45 p.m., plaintiff again returned to the 3-B
Clinic. At that time, another nurse examined plaintiff and
again concluded that he did not require emergency treatment.
Later that evening, plaintiff was examined in the Acute Care
Hospital at CSP-Corcoran by Dr. Julian Kim.
Thereafter, plaintiff was sent to the Mercy Hospital
Emergency Room, where he was examined by Dr. Noor Jaber.
Plaintiff had a catheter inserted and was admitted to the
hospital. Plaintiff was discharged from the hospital on
January 29, 2014.
DISPUTED FACTUAL ISSUES
Whether defendant was deliberately indifferent to the
plaintiff’s medical needs.
Whether the plaintiff suffered any medical complications as a
result of the alleged delay in providing him medical care.
DISPUTED EVIDENTIARY ISSUES/MOTIONS IN LIMINE
parties have not yet filed motions in limine. The
court does not encourage the filing of motions in
limine unless they are addressed to issues that can
realistically be resolved by the court prior to trial and
without reference to the other evidence which will be
introduced by the parties at trial. The parties anticipate
filing the motions in limine below. Any motions
in limine counsel elects to file shall be filed no
later than 21 days before trial. Opposition
shall be filed no later than 14 days before
trial and any replies shall be filed no later than
10 days before trial. Upon receipt of any
opposition briefs, the court will notify the parties if it
will hear argument on any motions in limine prior to
the first day of trial.
Motions in Limine
Motion in limine to bar defendant from presenting
evidence of or making reference to plaintiff’s criminal
history, the criminal history of plaintiff’s witnesses,
plaintiff’s history of administrative appeals and
litigation unrelated to this instant lawsuit, and any
documents not previously disclosed to plaintiff.
Motion in limine to bar testimony of
defendant’s expert witnesses if it is revealed through
deposition that their opinions are based in whole or in part
on materials that should have been produced during discovery
and which were withheld from plaintiff.
Plaintiff anticipates objecting to defendant’s proposed
Motions in Limine
Defendant states that he objects to the introduction of
testimony by plaintiff including but not limited to, type of
treatment, rationale for treatment, and appropriateness of
treatment, and causation of subsequent medical conditions.
SPECIAL FACTUAL INFORMATION
factual information pursuant to Local Rule 281(b)(6) is not
applicable to this action.
seeks compensatory damages in the amount of $300, 000.00 and
punitive damages in the amount of $100, 000.00.
POINTS OF LAW
claims and defenses in this case arise under federal law. All
of plaintiff’s claims are brought against defendant M.
1. The elements of, standards for, and burden of proof in a
cause of action for deliberate indifference to a
prisoner’s right to medical care pursuant to the Eighth
2. The elements of, standards for, and burden of proof for an
award of punitive damages. Trial briefs addressing the points
of law implicated by these remaining claims shall be filed
with this court no later than 7 days before
trial in accordance with Local Rule 285.
CAUSES OF ACTION OR AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES NOT EXPLICITLY
ASSERTED IN THE PRETRIAL ORDER UNDER POINTS OF LAW AT THE
TIME IT BECOMES FINAL ARE DISMISSED AND DEEMED WAIVED.
witnesses shall be those listed in Attachment
A. Defendant’s witnesses shall be those listed
in Attachment B. Each party may call any
witnesses designated by the other.
The court does not allow undisclosed witnesses to be
called for any purpose, including
impeachment or rebuttal, unless they meet the following
(1) The party offering the witness demonstrates that the
witness is for the purpose of rebutting evidence that could
not be reasonably anticipated at the pretrial conference, or
(2) The witness was discovered after the pretrial conference
and the proffering party makes the showing required in
paragraph B, below.
the post pretrial discovery of any witness a party wishes to
present at trial, the party shall promptly inform the court
and opposing parties of the existence of the unlisted
witnesses so the court may consider whether the witnesses
shall be permitted to testify at trial. The witnesses will
not be permitted unless:
(1) The witness could not reasonably have been discovered
prior to the discovery cutoff;
(2) The court and opposing parties were promptly notified
upon discovery of the witness;
(3) If time permitted, the party proffered the witness for
(4) If time did not permit, a reasonable summary of the
witness’s testimony was provided to opposing parties.
EXHIBITS, SCHEDULES, AND SUMMARIES
exhibits are listed in Attachment C. At
trial, joint exhibits shall be identified as JX and listed
numerically, e.g., JX-1, JX-2. At the moment, the parties
have not designated any joint exhibits.
exhibits are listed in Attachment D.
Defendant’s exhibits are listed in Attachment
E. No. exhibit shall be marked with or entered into
evidence under multiple exhibit numbers, and the parties are
hereby directed to meet and confer for the purpose of
designating joint exhibits. All exhibits must be pre-marked
as discussed below. At trial, joint exhibits shall be
identified as JX and listed numerically, e.g., JX-1, JX-2.
Plaintiff’s exhibits shall be listed numerically and
defendants’ exhibits shall be listed alphabetically.
All exhibits must be pre-marked. The parties must prepare
three (3) separate exhibit binders for use by the court at
trial, with a side tab identifying each exhibit in accordance
with the specifications above. Each binder shall have an
identification label on the front and spine. The parties must
exchange exhibits no later than 28 days before
trial. Any objections to exhibits are due no later
than 14 days before trial. The final
exhibits are due the Thursday before the trial date, which is
October 24, 2019. In making any objection,
the party is to set forth the grounds for the objection. As
to each exhibit which is not objected to, it shall be marked
and received into evidence and will require no further
court does not allow the use of undisclosed exhibits for any
purpose, including impeachment or rebuttal, unless
they meet the following criteria
court will not admit exhibits other than those identified on
the exhibit lists referenced above unless:
(1) The party proffering the exhibit demonstrates that the
exhibit is for the purpose of rebutting evidence that could
not have been reasonably anticipated, or
(2) The exhibit was discovered after the issuance of this
order and the proffering party makes the showing required in
paragraph B, below.
the discovery of exhibits after the discovery cutoff, a party
shall promptly inform the court and opposing parties of the
existence of such exhibits so that the court may consider
their admissibility at trial. The exhibits will not be
received unless the proffering party demonstrates:
(1) The exhibits could not reasonably have been discovered
(2) The court and the opposing parties were promptly informed
of their existence;
(3) The proffering party forwarded a copy of the exhibits (if
physically possible) to the opposing party. If the exhibits
may not be copied the proffering party must show that it has
made the exhibits reasonably available for inspection by the
parties must lodge the sealed original copy of any deposition
transcript to be used at trial with the Clerk of the ...