Case: Norbert v. San Francisco Sheriff's Department

3:19-cv-02724 | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California

Filed Date: May 20, 2019

Case Ongoing

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On May 20, 2019, plaintiffs filed this lawsuit in federal court in the Northern District of California. Plaintiffs sought to represent a class of prisoners subjected to unconstitutional conditions in San Francisco county jails. More specifically, they sought to represent people having been confined in their cells for up to 23.5 hours per day with total denial of access to direct sunlight or outdoor recreation. Plaintiffs sued the San Francisco County Sheriff’s Department, the City and County of San Francisco, and four members of the Sheriff’s Department for being directly involved in designing and implementing the policies that led to deprivations of constitutional and statutory rights. Plaintiffs brought suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against defendants for acting under the color of law to deprive plaintiffs of their constitutional rights. The violative conduct, plaintiffs alleged, constituted cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution and contravened the due process requirements of the Fourteenth Amendment. The plaintiffs also alleged two violations of the California Constitution and brought two tort claims against the Sheriff’s Office for negligence and intentional infliction of emotional distress. The plaintiffs, represented by a local civil rights lawyer, sought declaratory and injunctive relief as well as compensatory and punitive damages for the physical and emotional ailments incurred due to deprivation of sunlight.

On June 27, 2019, plaintiffs filed a motion for a preliminary injunction and, on August 30, 2019, defendants filed a motion to dismiss. The court ruled on both motions on January 31, 2020, granting each in part and denying each in part. The preliminary injunction had challenged the sufficiency of the type of sunlight that prisoners received in their cells and the amount of time that inmates confined to their cells for 23.5 hours a day were allotted for outdoor exercise. The court found that the plaintiffs had failed to prove specific harm from degree or quality of sunlight and that the defendants’ denial of outdoor exercise did not warrant a preliminary injunction for convicted prisoners, with a partial exception for prisoners in administrative segregation units. These prisoners were held in cells too small for meaningful exercise for 23.5 hours a day. The court ordered that these prisoners be allowed exercise in the gym for at least one hour a day for five days a week. The court did not order the defendant to provide outdoor exercise for these persons.

However, the court found that for pretrial detainees, denial of direct sunlight for four years constituted unconstitutional punishment. Pretrial detainees, as innocent persons, have the right to be free from punishment generally under the Due Process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and not just cruel and unusual punishment vis a vis the Eighth Amendment. The court ordered that the defendant provide at least one hour of exposure to direct sunlight each week for pretrial detainees, absent disciplinary issues.

The motion to dismiss was also granted in part and denied in part. The court dismissed all Eighth Amendment claims by pretrial detainees, deeming them redundant with respect to these plaintiffs’ Fourteenth Amendment Claims. The motion to dismiss the federal claims against individual defendants was also granted because the court found that the defendants could not have reasonably known that they were violating plaintiffs constitutional rights at the time of their acts and were therefore entitled to a defense of qualified immunity. However, qualified immunity does not extend to state law claims, like those leveled under the California Constitution and the common law. Therefore, most of these claims were sustained, although the court required plaintiffs to amend certain elements of their complaint and removed certain defendants for jurisdictional reasons.

On February 28, 2020, the City and County of San Francisco appealed the ruling to the 9th Circuit, and the plaintiffs cross-appealed on March 11. The parties also agreed to a continuance while they continued settlement negotiations. After the settlement negotiations concluded unsuccessfully, San Francisco moved to stay the preliminary injunction pending appeal. The court, however, denied this motion as moot, finding the the preliminary injunction had expired after 90 days and not been extended or made permanent. A three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit released its opinion on August 26, 2021, holding the district court did not make an error in denying broader relief in the preliminary injunction to the plaintiffs, and dismissing the City's appeal as moot. 10 F.4th 918.

Meanwhile, back in the district court, the plaintiffs filed their class certification motion on December 4, 2020, followed by a second motion for preliminary injunction on January 11, 2021, requesting the initial preliminary injunction be renewed and expanded. Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim denied this motion on March 23, 2021, finding the COVID-19 pandemic had significantly changed the public interest considerations since the first preliminary injunction was partially issued. The court also ruled the San Francisco Sheriff's Department had "engaged in a thorough and specific analysis" of the risks from COVID-19 and struck a balance between protecting mental health and safeguarding against COVID-19 that the court did not have the expertise to second guess.

On August 31, 2021, the court denied the plaintiffs' motion for class certification and ordered the parties to meet and confer about either a stipulation on class certification or a stipulation for briefing and hearing on a renewed motion for class certification.

The parties began discovery, and on July 25, 2022, the parties stipulated to class certification. Two days later, on July 27, 2022 Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim granted the stipulation. Class 1 ("Outdoor Class") was defined as all inmates who are pretrial detainees and have been incarcerated in San Francisco Jail 3 located in San Bruno, CA, at any point during the time period May 20, 2017 to present, and who do not have outdoor access as part of their incarceration at San Francisco County Jail 3. Class 2 ("Confinement Class") was defined as all inmates who are pretrial detainees and have been incarcerated in County Jail 3 located in San Bruno, CA, at any point during the same period as Class A, and who have fewer than one hour per 24 hour period of time out of their cells. Subclass 1 ("Confinement Subclass 1") was defined as all inmates in the Confinement Class who are classified by the San Francisco County Sheriff's Office in general population housing. Subclass 2 ("Confinement Subclass 2") was defined as all inmates in the Confinement Class who are classified by the San Francisco County Sheriff's Office in administrative segregation housing.

After a few more months of discovery, both sides moved for summary judgment in October and November, 2022.

On April 5, 2023 the court granted in part and denied in part the defendants' motion for summary judgment and denied the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment. The court also granted the defendants' motion to strike the plaintiffs' prayer for damages, striking both compensatory and punitive damages. In regards to the claims for violation of the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and California Constitution for insufficient out-of-cell time, the court denied both motions for summary judgment saying there remained a question of fact as to the constitutionality of time the plaintiffs were allowed out of their cells and whether the defendants' restrictions satisfied rational basis review. The court also denied both motions for summary judgment on the issue of access to sunlight and light in general, explaining that the issue of whether the defendants had a rational reason for creating a situation in which inmates had no access to direct sunlight was fact-dependent. The court granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment as to the claim for violation of Article I § 17 of the California Constitution, explaining that this Article mirrors the Eighth Amendment and the Court already found that the Eight Amendment did not apply in this case.

The court set trial dates for August 8-11, and 15-17, 2023. A final settlement conference was held on July 18, 2023, in which the court outlined settlement terms, but the parties were unable to reach an agreement.

Following the seven day trial, the court issued its judgment, as well as findings of fact and conclusions of law, on October 17, 2023, ultimately finding in the plaintiffs’ favor, though it did rule in the defendants’ favor on a few claims. 2023 WL 6847576. The court found that by failing to provide the plaintiff’s any access to direct sunlight, the defendant violated the plaintiffs’ rights under the Fourteenth Amendment, and Article I Section 7 of the California Constitution. The court noted in its findings of fact that a lack of sunlight was linked to physical health issues, and found that the defendant was recklessly indifferent to the plaintiffs' needs in that respect. Despite the defendant's arguments, the court contended that there was no real reason why the defendant couldn’t build an exercise yard for outdoor exercise to provide inmates with access to direct sunlight. The court ordered the defendant to offer each inmate who had been incarcerated for longer than a year daily access to direct sunlight for at least 15 minutes (weather permitting and in the absence of an emergency).

The court found for the defendant on the remaining claims, concluding that the defendant did not violate the plaintiffs’ rights by restricting them to their cells during the COVID-19 pandemic (from March 2020 to August 2022), nor were the plaintiffs’ rights violated by the failure to allow them to spend four hours a day out of their cells. The court emphasized that a genuine emergency could serve as a rational basis for complete lockdown and deprivation of certain rights, and concluded that the plaintiffs failed to establish a clear connection between staffing shortages and the denial of sufficient out-of-cell time. The court also noted a lack of evidence demonstrating that, even with full staffing, the defendant could have provided more out-of-cell time during the pandemic. Regarding the general claim for four hours of out-of-cell time for inmates in administrative segregation, the court found a lack of evidence showing harm beyond the inherent discomfort of jail conditions.

On October 31, 2023, Plaintiffs filed a motion for attorney's fees and costs, seeking $2,297,373.15 in fees and costs. On July 2, 2024, the court granted in part and denied in part Plaintiffs' motions for attorney's fees and costs. The court awarded Plaintiffs $585, 831.89 in attorney's fees and $50,869.57 in costs.

On January 22, 2024, defendants filed a motion for clarification to confirm that the modifications undertaken by the jail satisfied the court's order to provide inmates incarcerated for over a year with at least 15 minutes of daily access to direct sunlight.

On July 31, 2024, Plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. On December 4, 2024, Plaintiffs filed a brief arguing that the district court's order that allowed a year of total sunlight deprivation and then 15 minutes of daily sunlight was insufficient to protect the inmates' health. To support their point, Plaintiffs cited various pieces of evidence (such as expert testimony, community standards, comparisons to other detention facilities) that suggested at least 1 hour of daily outdoor access is necessary. Additionally, they argued that the district court's remedy was not "narrowly drawn" as required by the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) and it failed to adequately address the constitutional violation.

Summary Authors

Dan Toubman (3/14/2020)

Ben Marvin-Vanderryn (3/29/2022)

Nina Leeds (4/15/2023)

Simran Takhar (11/19/2023)

Renuka Wagh (2/22/2025)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/15645369/parties/brackens-v-city-and-county-of-san-francisco/

Judge(s)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Attorney for Defendant

Baumgartner, Margaret W. (California)

Berdux, Sabrina Michelle (California)

Expert/Monitor/Master/Other

Abel, Jonathan Philip (California)

Attorney, Mr. Stuart

Attorney, Eric Craig

Judge(s)

Kim, Sallie (California)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Brody, Richard A. (California)

Doughty, Rachel S.

Huang, Yolanda (California)

Kim, Andrew Chan (California)

Attorney for Defendant

Baumgartner, Margaret W. (California)

Berdux, Sabrina Michelle (California)

Kelly, Steven Patrick (California)

Murphy, Kaitlyn M (California)

Rollan, Raymond R. (California)

Other

Abel, Jonathan Philip (California)

Attorney, Mr. Stuart

Attorney, Eric Craig

Counsel, Kellie Walters,

Attorney Contact Information via CourtListener

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Documents in this case

3:19-cv-02724	Docket	March 13, 2020	March 13, 2020 Docket
1 3:19-cv-02724	Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief and Damages Class Action	May 20, 2019	May 20, 2019 Complaint
110 3:19-cv-02724	Order Regarding Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction and Defendants' Motion to Dismiss	Jan. 31, 2020	Jan. 31, 2020 Order/Opinion
138 3:19-cv-02724	Stipulation and Order for Partial Stay of Injunction and Stay of Appeal	March 11, 2020	March 11, 2020 Order/Opinion
191 3:19-cv-02724	Notice of Motion and Motion for Class Certification; Memorandum of Points and Authority Norbert v. San Francisco County Sheriff's Department	Dec. 4, 2020	Dec. 4, 2020 Pleading / Motion / Brief
208 3:19-cv-02724	Order Denying Second Motion for Preliminary Injunction	March 23, 2021	March 23, 2021 Order/Opinion
53 3:19-cv-02724 20-15341 20-15449	Opinion Norbert v. City and County of San Francisco U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit	Aug. 26, 2021	Aug. 26, 2021 Order/Opinion 10 F.4th 918
238 3:19-cv-02724	Order Granting Stipulation for Class Certification	July 27, 2022	July 27, 2022 Order/Opinion
325 3:19-cv-02724	Order Denying Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment and Granting in Part and Denying in Part Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment Norbert v. San Francisco Sheriff	April 5, 2023	April 5, 2023 Order/Opinion
478 3:19-cv-02724	Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law	Oct. 17, 2023	Oct. 17, 2023 Order/Opinion 2023 WL 6847576

show / hide documents

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/15645369/brackens-v-city-and-county-of-san-francisco/

Last updated April 9, 2026, 5:23 a.m.

Change selected docket

ECF Number	Date	Description	Link
1	May 20, 2019	CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND DAMAGES: (1) Cruel and Unusual Denial of Outdoor Recreation: Violations of 8th and 14th amendments of U.S. Constitution and Article I, Sections 7 and 17 of the California Constitution, 15 CCR 1065; (2) Cruel and Unusual Imposition of Confinement and Denial of Out of Cell Time: Violations of 8th and 14th amendments of U.S. Constitution and Article I, Sections 7 and 17 of the California Constitution and 15 CCR 1065; Jury Trial Demanded against All Defendants, (Filing Fee: $400.00, receipt number 0971-13361834). Filed by Kenyon M. Norbert, Jr. (Attachments: #(1) Civil Cover Sheet)(Huang, Yolanda) (Filed on 5/20/2019) Modified on 5/21/2019 (tnS, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 05/20/2019) 1 Civil Cover Sheet View on PACER	Clearinghouse
2	May 20, 2019	Case assigned to Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim. Counsel for plaintiff or the removing party is responsible for serving the Complaint or Notice of Removal, Summons and the assigned judge's standing orders and all other new case documents upon the opposing parties. For information, visit E-Filing A New Civil Case at http://cand.uscourts.gov/ecf/caseopening.Standing orders can be downloaded from the court's web page at www.cand.uscourts.gov/judges. Upon receipt, the summons will be issued and returned electronically. Counsel is required to send chambers a copy of the initiating documents pursuant to L.R. 5-1(e)(7). A scheduling order will be sent by Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) within two business days. Consent/Declination due by 6/3/2019. (bwS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/20/2019) (Entered: 05/20/2019)	RECAP
3	May 21, 2019	Initial Case Management Scheduling Order with ADR Deadlines: Joint Case Management Statement due by 8/12/2019. Initial Case Management Conference set for 8/19/2019 at 1:30 PM in San Francisco, Courtroom C, 15th Floor. (tnS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/21/2019) (Entered: 05/21/2019)	RECAP
4	May 23, 2019	Proposed Summons. (Huang, Yolanda) (Filed on 5/23/2019) (Entered: 05/23/2019)	RECAP
5	May 24, 2019	Summons Issued as to Defendants City and County of San Francisco, Vicki Hennessy, Jason Jackson, Captain McConnell, Paul Miyamoto & San Francisco Sheriff's Department. (tnS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/24/2019) (Entered: 05/24/2019)	RECAP
6	June 6, 2019	Consent to Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction filed by Kenyon Norbert. (Huang, Yolanda) (Filed on 6/6/2019) (Entered: 06/06/2019)	RECAP
7	June 18, 2019	NOTICE of Appearance by Margaret W. Baumgartner - NOTICE OF APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL (Baumgartner, Margaret) (Filed on 6/18/2019) (Entered: 06/18/2019)	RECAP
8	June 27, 2019	NOTICE OF MOTION & MOTION for Preliminary Injunction and Related Relief filed by Kenyon Norbert. Motion Hearing set for 8/5/2019 09:30 AM in San Francisco, Courtroom C, 15th Floor before Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim. Responses due by 7/11/2019. Replies due by 7/18/2019. (Attachments: # 1 Supplement Memorandum of Points & Authorities, # 2 Affidavit Declaration of Dr. Terry Kupers, # 3 Affidavit Declaration of Dr. Jamie Zeitzer, # 4 Affidavit Declaration f Armando Carlos, # 5 Affidavit Declaration of Montrail Brackens, # 6 Affidavit Declaration of Marshall Harris, # 7 Affidavit Declaration of James McFarland, # 8 Affidavit Declaration of Kenyon Norbert, # 9 Affidavit Declaration of Jose Poot, # 10 Affidavit Declaration of Candido Zayas, # 11 Affidavit Declaration of Yolanda Huang)(Huang, Yolanda) (Filed on 6/27/2019) (Entered: 06/27/2019) 1 Supplement Memorandum of Points & Authorities View on PACER 2 Affidavit Declaration of Dr. Terry Kupers View on PACER 3 Affidavit Declaration of Dr. Jamie Zeitzer View on RECAP 4 Affidavit Declaration f Armando Carlos View on PACER 5 Affidavit Declaration of Montrail Brackens View on PACER 6 Affidavit Declaration of Marshall Harris View on PACER 7 Affidavit Declaration of James McFarland View on PACER 8 Affidavit Declaration of Kenyon Norbert View on PACER 9 Affidavit Declaration of Jose Poot View on PACER 10 Affidavit Declaration of Candido Zayas View on PACER 11 Affidavit Declaration of Yolanda Huang View on PACER	RECAP
9	July 1, 2019	CLERK'S NOTICE Re: Consent or Declination: Defendants shall file a consent or declination to proceed before a magistrate judge by 7/8/2019. Note that any party is free to withhold consent to proceed before a magistrate judge without adverse substantive consequences. The forms are available at: http://cand.uscourts.gov/civilforms. (mklS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/1/2019) (Entered: 07/01/2019)	RECAP
10	July 8, 2019	CONSENT/DECLINATION to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge by City and County of San Francisco, Vicki Hennessy, Jason Jackson, Captain McConnell, Paul Miyamoto, San Francisco Sheriff's Department.. (Baumgartner, Margaret) (Filed on 7/8/2019) (Entered: 07/08/2019)	RECAP
11	July 11, 2019	OPPOSITION/RESPONSE (re 8 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction ) OPPOSITION AND MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION filed byCity and County of San Francisco, Vicki Hennessy, Jason Jackson, Captain McConnell, Paul Miyamoto, San Francisco Sheriff's Department. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration Kevin McConnell, # 2 Declaration Matthew Freeman, # 3 Exhibit Exhibit A to Matthew Freeman Declaration)(Baumgartner, Margaret) (Filed on 7/11/2019) (Entered: 07/11/2019) 1 Declaration Kevin McConnell View on PACER 2 Declaration Matthew Freeman View on PACER 3 Exhibit Exhibit A to Matthew Freeman Declaration View on PACER	RECAP
12	July 18, 2019	REPLY (re 8 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction ) filed byMontrail Brackens, Michael Brown, Armando Carlos, Marshall Harris, Troy McAllister, Kenyon Norbert, Jose Poot. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration Dr. Terry Kupers, # 2 Declaration Armando Carlos, # 3 Declaration Yolanda Huang)(Huang, Yolanda) (Filed on 7/18/2019) (Entered: 07/18/2019) 1 Declaration Dr. Terry Kupers View on PACER 2 Declaration Armando Carlos View on PACER 3 Declaration Yolanda Huang View on PACER	RECAP
13	July 19, 2019	ADR Certification (ADR L.R. 3-5 b) of discussion of ADR options filed by Plaintiffs (Huang, Yolanda) (Filed on 7/19/2019) (Entered: 07/19/2019)	RECAP
14	July 19, 2019	NOTICE of Appearance by Sabrina Michelle Berdux - NOTICE OF APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL (Berdux, Sabrina) (Filed on 7/19/2019) (Entered: 07/19/2019)	RECAP
15	July 22, 2019	STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO 1 COMPLAINT filed by City and County of San Francisco, Vicki Hennessy, Jason Jackson, Captain McConnell, Paul Miyamoto, San Francisco Sheriff's Department. (Berdux, Sabrina) (Filed on 7/22/2019) (Entered: 07/22/2019)	RECAP
16	July 23, 2019	ADR Certification (ADR L.R. 3-5 b) of discussion of ADR options ADR CERTIFICATION BY PARTIES AND COUNSEL (Berdux, Sabrina) (Filed on 7/23/2019) (Entered: 07/23/2019)	RECAP
17	July 23, 2019	REPLY (re 8 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction ) - [Correction of Docket 12] - (Memorandum of Points and Authorities) filed by Montrail Brackens, Michael Brown, Armando Carlos, Marshall Harris, Troy McAllister, Kenyon Norbert, Jose Poot. (Huang, Yolanda) (Filed on 7/23/2019) (Entered: 07/23/2019)	RECAP
18	July 25, 2019	ORDER REGARDING JUDICIAL SITE VISITS. Telephone Conference set for 8/1/2019 08:00 AM in San Francisco, Chambers/Courtroom C before Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim. Signed by Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim on 7/25/2019. (mklS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/25/2019) (Entered: 07/25/2019)	RECAP
19	Aug. 1, 2019	Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim: Telephone Conference held on 8/1/2019. The Court and counsel discuss scheduling and logistics for the site visits. Counsel shall continue to meet and confer regarding the video recording and accessibility of the materials after the site visits. If there are still outstanding issues, each side may file a four page letter brief by 8/9/2019 and the Court will resolve it. The audio recording of this proceeding is sealed by the Court. (Sealed FTR Time: 8:01-8:13.) Attorney for Plaintiffs: Yolanda Huang. Attorney for Defendants: Sabrina Berdux; Margaret Baumgartner. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (mklS, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 8/1/2019) Modified on 8/5/2019 (mklS, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 08/01/2019)	RECAP
20	Aug. 1, 2019	Document Sealed at the Court's direction.STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER re 3 Initial Case Management Scheduling Order with ADR Deadlines, To Continue Case Management Conference and Extend Accompanying Dates filed by Montrail Brackens, Michael Brown, Armando Carlos, Marshall Harris, Troy McAllister, Kenyon Norbert, Jose Poot. (Huang, Yolanda) (Filed on 8/1/2019) Modified on 8/2/2019 (mklS, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 08/01/2019)	RECAP
	Aug. 1, 2019	~Util - Set Deadlines/Hearings
	Aug. 1, 2019	Telephone Conference
21	Aug. 5, 2019	Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim: Motion Hearing held on 8/5/2019 re 8 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by Kenyon Norbert. Argument heard. The Court may order further briefing after the site visits are completed. (FTR Time: 10:18-10:44.) Attorney for Plaintiffs: Yolanda Huang. Attorneys for Defendants: Kaitlyn Murphy; Sabrina Berdux; Margaret Baumgartner. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (mklS, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 8/5/2019) Modified on 3/4/2020: Matter transcribed by Peggy Schuerger (AdHoc Reporting). (rjdS, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 08/05/2019)	RECAP
22	Aug. 5, 2019	ORDER by Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim granting 20 Stipulation to Continue Case Management Conference and Extend Accompanying Dates. Case Management Statement due by 9/23/2019. Initial Case Management Conference reset for 9/30/2019 01:30 PM in San Francisco, Courtroom C, 15th Floor. (mklS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/5/2019) (Entered: 08/05/2019)	RECAP
	Aug. 5, 2019	Motion Hearing
23	Aug. 7, 2019	PDF with attached Audio File. Court Date & Time [ 8/5/2019 10:17:58 AM ]. File Size [ 12536 KB ]. Run Time [ 00:26:07 ]. (courtspeak). (Entered: 08/07/2019)	RECAP
25	Aug. 9, 2019	Document Sealed at the Court's direction. Letter from Plaintiffs RE: VIDEO, AUDIO PHOTOGRAHIC RECORDINGS OF JUDICIAL SITE VISIT OF SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY JAIL 4 AND COUNTY JAIL 5. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order RE: VIDEO, AUDIO PHOTOGRAHIC RECORDINGS OF JUDICIAL SITE VISIT OF SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY JAIL 4 AND COUNTY JAIL 5)(Huang, Yolanda) (Filed on 8/9/2019) Modified on 8/13/2019 (mklS, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 08/09/2019)	RECAP
26	Aug. 12, 2019	ORDER REGARDING PROTECTIVE ORDER. Signed by Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim on 8/12/2019. (mklS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/12/2019) (Entered: 08/12/2019)	RECAP
27	Aug. 13, 2019	Document Sealed at the Court's direction. Letter from Plaintiffs Supplemental Re Site Visit. (Huang, Yolanda) (Filed on 8/13/2019) Modified on 8/13/2019 (mklS, COURT STAFF). Modified on 8/13/2019 (mklS, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 08/13/2019)	RECAP
28	Aug. 14, 2019	CLERK'S NOTICE Setting Telephone Conference: Notice is given that a Telephone Conference is set for 8/15/2019 08:00 AM in San Francisco, Chambers before Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim. The Court will circulate dial-in information to counsel through separate email. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (mklS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/14/2019) (Entered: 08/14/2019)	RECAP
	Aug. 14, 2019	Clerk's Notice
29	Aug. 15, 2019	Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim: Telephone Conference held on 8/15/2019. The Court and counsel discuss further logistics for the site visits. The audio recording of this proceeding is sealed by the Court. (Sealed FTR Time: 8:01-8:10.) Attorney for Plaintiffs: Yolanda Huang. Attorney for Defendants: Sabrina Berdux. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (mklS, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 8/15/2019) (Entered: 08/15/2019)	RECAP
	Aug. 15, 2019	1 - Terminate Hearings
	Aug. 15, 2019	Telephone Conference
30	Aug. 19, 2019	CLERK'S NOTICE Setting Telephone Conference: Notice is given that a Telephone Conference is set for 8/22/2019 08:00 AM in San Francisco, Chambers before Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim. The Court will circulate dial-in information to counsel by separate email. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (mklS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/19/2019) (Entered: 08/19/2019)	RECAP
	Aug. 19, 2019	Clerk's Notice
31	Aug. 22, 2019	Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim: Telephone Conference held on 8/22/2019. The Court and counsel discuss follow up issues from the site visits. A written order will issue. (FTR Time: 8:01-8:16.) Attorney for Plaintiff: Yolanda Huang. Attorneys for Defendants: Sabrina Berdux; Kaitlyn Murphy. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (mklS, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 8/22/2019) (Entered: 08/22/2019)	RECAP
32	Aug. 22, 2019	ORDER ESTABLISHING EVIDENTIARY PROCEDURES. Evidentiary Hearing tentatively set for 10/9/2019 09:30 AM in San Francisco, Courtroom C, 15th Floor before Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim. Signed by Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim on 8/22/2019. (mklS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/22/2019) (Entered: 08/22/2019)	RECAP
	Aug. 22, 2019	1 - Terminate Hearings
	Aug. 22, 2019	Telephone Conference
33	Aug. 26, 2019	Letter Re Modifications to Scheduling On Evidentiary Procedures. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order Modifying Schedule Re: Preliminary Injunction Motion Dates)(Huang, Yolanda) (Filed on 8/26/2019) (Entered: 08/26/2019) 1 Proposed Order Modifying Schedule Re: Preliminary Injunction Motion Dates View on RECAP	RECAP
34	Aug. 28, 2019	ORDER MODIFYING EXPERT WITNESS SCHEDULE. Evidentiary Hearing reset for 10/23/2019 09:30 AM in San Francisco, Courtroom C, 15th Floor before Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim. Signed by Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim on 8/28/2019. (mklS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/28/2019) (Entered: 08/28/2019)	RECAP
35	Aug. 28, 2019	RESPONSE re 32 Order,, Set Hearings, Plaintiffs' Proposed Questions to Defendant San Francisco County Sheriff's Department by Montrail Brackens, Michael Brown, Armando Carlos, Marshall Harris, Troy McAllister, Kenyon Norbert, Jose Poot. (Huang, Yolanda) (Filed on 8/28/2019) (Entered: 08/28/2019)	RECAP
36	Aug. 29, 2019	QUESTIONS TO DEFENDANTS REGARDING JAIL SITE VISITS. Signed by Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim on 8/29/2019. (mklS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/29/2019) (Entered: 08/29/2019)	RECAP
37	Aug. 30, 2019	DEFENDANTS NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFFS COMPLAINT filed by City and County of San Francisco, Vicki Hennessy, Jason Jackson, Captain McConnell, Paul Miyamoto. Motion Hearing set for 10/7/2019 09:30 AM in San Francisco, Courtroom C, 15th Floor before Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim. Responses due by 9/13/2019. Replies due by 9/20/2019. (Berdux, Sabrina) (Filed on 8/30/2019) (Entered: 08/30/2019)	RECAP
38	Sept. 4, 2019	ORDER SETTING HEARING DATE as to 8 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction and 37 MOTION to Dismiss DEFENDANTS NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFFS COMPLAINT. Motion Hearing set for 11/18/2019 01:30 PM in San Francisco, Courtroom C, 15th Floor before Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim. Signed by Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim on 9/4/2019. (mklS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/4/2019) (Entered: 09/04/2019)	RECAP
39	Sept. 4, 2019	Discovery Letter Brief for Extension for Responses to Questions Regarding Jail Site Visits filed by City and County of San Francisco, Vicki Hennessy, Jason Jackson, Captain McConnell, Paul Miyamoto. (Berdux, Sabrina) (Filed on 9/4/2019) (Entered: 09/04/2019)	RECAP
40	Sept. 5, 2019	ORDER APPROVING EXTENSION FOR DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS RE: SITE VISITS. Signed by Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim on 9/5/2019. (mklS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/5/2019) (Entered: 09/05/2019)	RECAP
41	Sept. 10, 2019	Supplemental Response Regarding Defendants' Request for Protective Order Re Site Visit Photos and Videos re 32 Order - Reply Re Proposed Protective Order for Photos and Videos Taken During Site Visit filed by Montrail Brackens, Michael Brown, Armando Carlos, Marshall Harris, Troy McAllister, Kenyon Norbert, Jose Poot. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order, # 2 Exhibit Exhibit A- Gmail from Sabrina Berdux)(Related document(s) 32 ) (Huang, Yolanda) (Filed on 9/10/2019) (Entered: 09/10/2019) 1 Proposed Order View on PACER 2 Exhibit Exhibit A- Gmail from Sabrina Berdux View on PACER	RECAP
42	Sept. 12, 2019	Letter Brief re 36 Order filed byCity and County of San Francisco, Vicki Hennessy, Jason Jackson, Captain McConnell, Paul Miyamoto. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A (Redacted))(Related document(s) 36 ) (Berdux, Sabrina) (Filed on 9/12/2019) (Entered: 09/12/2019) 1 Exhibit A (Redacted) View on PACER	RECAP
43	Sept. 12, 2019	Administrative Motion to File Under Seal Exhibit A to Letter Brief filed by City and County of San Francisco, Vicki Hennessy, Jason Jackson, Captain McConnell, Paul Miyamoto, San Francisco Sheriff's Department. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration Sabrina M. Berdux, # 2 Proposed Order, # 3 Exhibit A (Redacted), # 4 Exhibit A (Not Redacted))(Berdux, Sabrina) (Filed on 9/12/2019) (Entered: 09/12/2019) 1 Declaration Sabrina M. Berdux View on PACER 2 Proposed Order View on PACER 3 Exhibit A (Redacted) View on PACER	RECAP
44	Sept. 13, 2019	OPPOSITION/RESPONSE to (re 37 DEFENDANTS' NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFFS COMPLAINT) filed by Montrail Brackens, Michael Brown, Armando Carlos, Marshall Harris, Troy McAllister, Kenyon Norbert, Jose Poot. (Huang, Yolanda) (Filed on 9/13/2019) (Entered: 09/13/2019)	RECAP
45	Sept. 16, 2019	ORDER REGARDING MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL by Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim; granting in part and denying in part 43 Administrative Motion to File Under Seal. (tlS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/16/2019) (Entered: 09/16/2019)	RECAP
46	Sept. 16, 2019	Ex Parte Application for Leave to File a Motion for Reconsideration of Portions of this Court's Order re 45 Order on Administrative Motion to File Under Seal For Leave to File Motion for Reconsideration of Dkt 45 filed by Montrail Brackens, Michael Brown, Armando Carlos, Marshall Harris, Troy McAllister, Kenyon Norbert, Jose Poot. (Attachments: #(1) Declaration of Yolanda Huang)(Huang, Yolanda) (Filed on 9/16/2019) (Entered: 09/16/2019) 1 Declaration of Yolanda Huang View on PACER	RECAP
47	Sept. 16, 2019	[Proposed] Order Granting re 46 Ex Parte Application for Leave to File a Motion for Reconsideration of Portions of re 45 Order on Administrative Motion to File Under Seal For Leave to File Motion for Reconsideration of Dkt 45 filed by Montrail Brackens, Michael Brown, Armando Carlos, Marshall Harris, Troy McAllister, Kenyon Norbert, Jose Poot. (Huang, Yolanda) (Filed on 9/16/2019) (Entered: 09/16/2019)	RECAP
48	Sept. 17, 2019	PROTECTIVE ORDER. Signed by Judge Sallie Kim on 9/17/2019. (tlS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/17/2019) (Entered: 09/17/2019)	RECAP
49	Sept. 18, 2019	ORDER GRANTING LEAVE TO FILE MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION by Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim; granting 46 Ex Parte Application. Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration due by 9/24/2019. (tlS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/18/2019) (Entered: 09/18/2019)	RECAP
50	Sept. 20, 2019	ORDER. Signed by Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim on 9/20/19. (sklc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/20/2019) (Entered: 09/20/2019)	RECAP
51	Sept. 20, 2019	REPLY (re 37 DEFENDANTS NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFFS COMPLAINT) - REPLY IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFFS COMPLAINT (Dkt. 37) filed by City and County of San Francisco, Vicki Hennessy, Jason Jackson, Captain McConnell, Paul Miyamoto. (Berdux, Sabrina) (Filed on 9/20/2019) (Entered: 09/20/2019)	RECAP
52	Sept. 23, 2019	ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION for Reconsideration and Modification of this Court's Order re 48 Protective Order Re: Defendants Request to File Under Seal Defendants' Responses (Dkt. 42-1) filed by Montrail Brackens, Michael Brown, Armando Carlos, Marshall Harris, Troy McAllister, Kenyon Norbert, Jose Poot. Responses due by 9/27/2019. (Attachments: #(1) [Proposed] Order)(Huang, Yolanda) (Filed on 9/23/2019) (Entered: 09/23/2019) 1 Proposed Order Proposed Order View on PACER	RECAP
53	Sept. 23, 2019	JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT and [Proposed[ Order filed by Montrail Brackens, Michael Brown, Armando Carlos, Marshall Harris, Troy McAllister, Kenyon Norbert, Jose Poot. (Huang, Yolanda) (Filed on 9/23/2019) (Entered: 09/23/2019)	Clearinghouse
54	Sept. 27, 2019	OPPOSITION/RESPONSE to (re 52 ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION to Modify Order Dkt 48 re 48 Protective Order) - OPPOSITION TO ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION MODIFY ORDER DKT 48 RE 48 PROTECTIVE ORDER (DKT. #52) filed by City and County of San Francisco, Vicki Hennessy, Jason Jackson, Captain McConnell, Paul Miyamoto. (Attachments: #(1) Declaration Kevin McConnell)(Berdux, Sabrina) (Filed on 9/27/2019) (Entered: 09/27/2019) 1 Declaration Kevin McConnell View on PACER	RECAP
55	Sept. 30, 2019	REVISED ORDER REGARDING 43 MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL by Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim (Re: 52 Administrative Motion for Reconsideration). (mklS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/30/2019) (Entered: 09/30/2019)	RECAP
56	Sept. 30, 2019	Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim: Initial Case Management Conference held on 9/30/2019. The parties will meet and confer to submit a stipulation to the Court by 10/7/2019 regarding the confidentiality of specific photographs from the site visits. Parties are also trying to come to an agreement regarding the blood draw issue. The Court sets the following briefing schedule, if the parties are unable to come to an agreement: Plaintiffs' opening brief due by 10/15/2019; Defendants' response due by 10/29/2019; Plaintiffs' reply due 11/12/2019. With regarding to the case schedule, the Court will allow Plaintiffs to submit proposed dates by 10/1/2019. If there are case management issues to be discussed at the next hearing on 10/23/2019 the parties may provide a one-page update to the Court by 10/21/2019. (FTR Time: 1:37-1:49.) Attorney for Plaintiffs: Yolanda Huang. Attorney for Defendants: Sabrina Berdux; Kaitlyn Murphy. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (mklS, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 9/30/2019) (Entered: 09/30/2019)	RECAP
57	Sept. 30, 2019	JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT filed by Montrail Brackens, Michael Brown, Armando Carlos, Marshall Harris, Troy McAllister, Kenyon Norbert, Jose Poot. (Huang, Yolanda) (Filed on 9/30/2019) (Entered: 09/30/2019)	RECAP
58	Oct. 2, 2019	SUPPLEMENTAL CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT - [Correction to Docket #57] filed by Montrail Brackens, Michael Brown, Armando Carlos, Marshall Harris, Troy McAllister, Kenyon Norbert, Jose Poot. (Huang, Yolanda) (Filed on 10/2/2019) (Entered: 10/02/2019)	RECAP
59	Oct. 3, 2019	CASE MANAGEMENT, SCHEDULING, AND PRETRIAL ORDER.Case referred to Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler for Settlement to be completed by 3/6/2020. Updated Case Management Statement due by 11/25/2019. Further Case Management Conference set for 12/2/2019 01:30 PM in San Francisco, Courtroom C, 15th Floor. Motion Hearing on Limited Summary Judgment Regarding Administrative Exhaustion set for 3/23/2020 09:30 AM in San Francisco, Courtroom C, 15th Floor before Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim. Close of Fact Discovery is 11/2/2020. Initial Expert Disclosure due by 12/1/2020. Rebuttal Expert Disclosure due by 1/4/2021. Close of Expert Discovery is 2/16/2021. Motion Hearing Regarding Class Certification set for 3/21/2021 09:30 AM in San Francisco, Courtroom C, 15th Floor before Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim. Dispositive Motion Hearing set for 5/24/2021 09:30 AM in San Francisco, Courtroom C, 15th Floor before Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim. Pretrial Conference set for 7/9/2021 01:30 PM in San Francisco, Courtroom C, 15th Floor before Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim. Jury Selection set for 8/10/2021 08:30 AM in San Francisco, Courtroom C, 15th Floor before Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim. Jury Trial set for 8/10/2021 08:30 AM in San Francisco, Courtroom C, 15th Floor before Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim. Signed by Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim on 10/3/2019. (mklS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/3/2019) (Entered: 10/03/2019)	RECAP
	Oct. 3, 2019	CASE REFERRED to Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler for Settlement (ahmS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/3/2019)
60	Oct. 4, 2019	CLERK'S NOTICE SETTING SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE SCHEDULING CALL: This case was referred for a settlement conference to Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler. The court sets a call with the parties to discuss the timing and logistics of the settlement conference for Thursday, 10/24/2019 at 11:15 AM. The court will email a call-in number separately. If this date does not work, parties may request to change the date by stipulation. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (ejkS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/4/2019) (Entered: 10/04/2019)	RECAP
	Oct. 4, 2019	Clerk's Notice
61	Oct. 8, 2019	DEFENDANTS STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER ON JAIL SITE PHOTOS AND VIDEOS REGARDING LEGAL OF CONFIDENTIALITY re 56 Case Management Conference filed by City and County of San Francisco, Vicki Hennessy, Jason Jackson, Captain McConnell, Paul Miyamoto. (Berdux, Sabrina) (Filed on 10/8/2019) (Entered: 10/08/2019)	RECAP
62	Oct. 10, 2019	Plaintiffs' Proposed Photos and Videos and Objections to re 61 DEFENDANTS [PROPOSED] STIPULATION ON JAIL SITE PHOTOS AND VIDEOS REGARDING LEGAL OF CONFIDENTIALITY filed by Montrail Brackens, Michael Brown, Armando Carlos, Marshall Harris, Troy McAllister, Kenyon Norbert, Jose Poot. (Huang, Yolanda) (Filed on 10/10/2019) (Entered: 10/10/2019)	RECAP
63	Oct. 15, 2019	MOTION to Compel Defendants San Francisco Sheriff's Department to Provide Access for Discovery filed by Montrail Brackens, Michael Brown, Armando Carlos, Marshall Harris, Troy McAllister, Kenyon Norbert, Jose Poot. Motion Hearing set for 11/18/2019 01:30 PM in San Francisco, Courtroom B, 15th Floor before Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim. Responses due by 10/29/2019. Replies due by 11/12/2019. (Attachments: # 1 Supplement Memorandum of Points and Authorities, # 2 Declaration Declaration of Yolanda Huang)(Huang, Yolanda) (Filed on 10/15/2019) (Entered: 10/15/2019) 1 Supplement Memorandum of Points and Authorities View on PACER 2 Declaration Declaration of Yolanda Huang View on PACER	RECAP
64	Oct. 15, 2019	EXHIBITS to re 63 MOTION to Compel Defendants San Francisco Sheriff's Department to Provide Access for Discovery - EXHIBIT A: Plaintiffs Letter dated 8.20.2019 EXHIBIT B: Upshaw Stipulation EXHIBIT C: Defendants Letter dated 10.3.2019 EXHIBIT D: Plaintiffs Letter dated 10.7.2019 EXHIBIT E: Defendants Letter dated 10.11.2019 EXHIBIT F-1 Dr. Zeitzer,f-2: Dr. Ghannam, F-3: Dr. Haar and F-3: Dr. Holick filed by Montrail Brackens, Michael Brown, Armando Carlos, Marshall Harris, Troy McAllister, Kenyon Norbert, Jose Poot. (Related document(s) 63 ) (Huang, Yolanda) (Filed on 10/15/2019) (Entered: 10/15/2019)	RECAP
65	Oct. 15, 2019	[Proposed] Order re 63 MOTION to Compel Defendants San Francisco Sheriff's Department to Provide Access for Discovery 64 Exhibits filed by Montrail Brackens, Michael Brown, Armando Carlos, Marshall Harris, Troy McAllister, Kenyon Norbert, Jose Poot. (Huang, Yolanda) (Filed on 10/15/2019) (Entered: 10/15/2019)	RECAP
66	Oct. 15, 2019	ORDER REGARDING PHOTOGRAPHS AND VIDEOS SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER (Re: Dockets nos. 61 and 62 ) by Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim. (mklS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/15/2019) (Entered: 10/15/2019)	RECAP
67	Oct. 15, 2019	DOCUMENT E-FILED UNDER SEAL re 45 Order on Administrative Motion to File Under Seal by City and County of San Francisco, Vicki Hennessy, Jason Jackson, Captain McConnell, Paul Miyamoto. (Berdux, Sabrina) (Filed on 10/15/2019) (Entered: 10/15/2019)	RECAP
68	Oct. 16, 2019	CLERK'S NOTICE Re: 63 MOTION to Compel Defendants San Francisco Sheriff's Department to Provide Access for Discovery. The Court previously set a briefing schedule and hearing date for this motion at docket no. 59 . The schedule is reset in accordance with the Court's prior order. Defendants' Opposition is due by 10/29/2019. Plaintiffs' Reply is due by 11/5/2019. Motion Hearing reset for 12/2/2019 01:30 PM in San Francisco, Courtroom C, 15th Floor before Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (mklS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/16/2019) (Entered: 10/16/2019)	RECAP
	Oct. 16, 2019	~Util - Set Motion and Deadlines/Hearings
	Oct. 16, 2019	Clerk's Notice
69	Oct. 23, 2019	Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim: Evidentiary Hearing held on 10/23/2019. (Sealed FTR Time: 9:37-11:32.) (Attachments: # 1 Hearing Log)(mklS, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 10/23/2019) Modified on 10/24/2019: Matter transcribed by Peggy Schuerger (AdHoc Reporting). (rjdS, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 10/23/2019) 1 Hearing Log View on PACER	RECAP
70	Oct. 24, 2019	TRANSCRIPT ORDER for proceedings held on 10/23/2019 before Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim by City and County of San Francisco, for Court Reporter FTR - San Francisco. (Berdux, Sabrina) (Filed on 10/24/2019) (Entered: 10/24/2019)	RECAP
71	Oct. 24, 2019	Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler: Settlement Conference Call held on 10/24/2019. The court sets the in-person settlement conference for Tuesday, February 18, 2020 at 10:00 AM. (Not Reported). Plaintiffs' Attorney: Yolanda Huang. Defendants' Attorney: Sabrina Michelle Berdux. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (ejkS, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 10/24/2019) (Entered: 10/24/2019)	RECAP
72	Oct. 24, 2019	Order Setting Settlement Conference before Magistrate Judge. Settlement Conference set for 2/18/2020 at 10:00 AM in San Francisco, Courtroom B, 15th Floor. Settlement Conference Statements due by 1/28/2020. Signed by Judge Laurel Beeler on 10/24/2019. (ejkS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/24/2019) (Entered: 10/24/2019)	RECAP
73	Oct. 24, 2019	ORDER REGARDING DISPUTED PHOTOGRAPHS AND VIDEOS SUBJECT TO THE PROTECTIVE ORDER. Signed by Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim on 10/24/2019. (mklS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/24/2019) (Entered: 10/24/2019)	RECAP
74	Oct. 24, 2019	ORDER REGARDING SEALING OF EVIDENTIARY HEARING TRANSCRIPT. Signed by Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim on 10/24/2019. (mklS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/24/2019) (Entered: 10/24/2019)	RECAP
75	Oct. 26, 2019	Sealed Transcript of Proceedings held on 10/23/2019, before Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim. Court Reporter/Transcriber Peggy Schuerger/Ad Hoc Reporting, Telephone number (619) 228-3774/adhocreporting@aol.com. Per General Order No. 59 and Judicial Conference policy,any Notice of Intent to Request Redaction, if required, is due no later than 5 business days from date of this filing. Redaction Request due 11/13/2019. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 11/25/2019. (pls, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/26/2019) (Entered: 10/26/2019)	RECAP
76	Oct. 28, 2019	ORDER DENYING MOTION TO RELATE CASES.The Administrative Motion [Dkt. 17 in 4:19-cv-2722-YGR] to determine whether the Court should relate cases 4:19-cv-2722-YGR and 3:19-cv-2724-SK is DENIED. Signed by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers on 10/28/2019. (fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/28/2019) (Entered: 10/29/2019)	RECAP
77	Oct. 29, 2019	OPPOSITION/RESPONSE to (re 63 MOTION to Compel Defendants San Francisco Sheriff's Department to Provide Access for Discovery) - RESPONSE TO MOTION TO COMPEL DEFENDANT SAN FRANCISCO SHERIFF DEPARTMENT TO PROVIDE ACCESS FOR DISCOVERY (DKT. 56, 63, 68) filed by City and County of San Francisco, Vicki Hennessy, Jason Jackson, Captain McConnell, Paul Miyamoto. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration Undersheriff Matthew Freeman, # 2 Declaration Lisa A. Pratt, MD, MPH, # 3 Declaration Sabrina M. Berdux, # 4 Exhibit A to Sabrina M. Berdux Declaration, # 5 Exhibit B to Sabrina M. Berdux Declaration)(Berdux, Sabrina) (Filed on 10/29/2019) (Entered: 10/29/2019) 1 Declaration Undersheriff Matthew Freeman View on PACER 2 Declaration Lisa A. Pratt, MD, MPH View on PACER 3 Declaration Sabrina M. Berdux View on PACER 4 Exhibit A to Sabrina M. Berdux Declaration View on PACER 5 Exhibit B to Sabrina M. Berdux Declaration View on PACER	RECAP
78	Nov. 1, 2019	ORDER UNSEALING EVIDENTIARY HEARING TRANSCRIPT AND FTR RECORDING. Signed by Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim on 11/1/19. (sklc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/1/2019) (Entered: 11/01/2019)	RECAP
79	Nov. 1, 2019	Supplemental Brief in Support of re 8 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by Montrail Brackens, Michael Brown, Armando Carlos, Marshall Harris, Troy McAllister, Kenyon Norbert, Jose Poot. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Montrail Brackens, # 2 Declaration of Armando Carlos, # 3 Declaration Kenyon Norbert, # 4 Declaration Kishawn Norbert, # 5 Declaration Roger Dominguez)(Related document(s) 8 ) (Huang, Yolanda) (Filed on 11/1/2019) (Entered: 11/01/2019) 1 Declaration of Montrail Brackens View on PACER 2 Declaration of Armando Carlos View on PACER 3 Declaration Kenyon Norbert View on PACER 4 Declaration Kishawn Norbert View on PACER 5 Declaration Roger Dominguez View on PACER	RECAP
80	Nov. 5, 2019	REPLY (re 63 MOTION to Compel Defendants San Francisco Sheriff's Department to Provide Access for Discovery ) filed byMontrail Brackens, Michael Brown, Armando Carlos, Marshall Harris, Troy McAllister, Kenyon Norbert, Jose Poot. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration Yolanda Huang)(Huang, Yolanda) (Filed on 11/5/2019) (Entered: 11/05/2019) 1 Declaration Yolanda Huang View on PACER	RECAP
81	Nov. 8, 2019	Supplemental Brief re 8 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction - DEFENDANTS SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING REGARDING PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION (DKT. 8) filed by City and County of San Francisco, Vicki Hennessy, Jason Jackson, Captain McConnell, Paul Miyamoto. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration Kaitlyn Murphy, # 2 Exhibit A to Declaration of Kaitlyn Murphy, # 3 Exhibit B to Declaration of Kaitlyn Murphy)(Related document(s) 8 ) (Murphy, Kaitlyn) (Filed on 11/8/2019) (Entered: 11/08/2019) 1 Declaration Kaitlyn Murphy View on PACER 2 Exhibit A to Declaration of Kaitlyn Murphy View on PACER 3 Exhibit B to Declaration of Kaitlyn Murphy View on PACER	RECAP
82	Nov. 12, 2019	CLERK'S NOTICE Re: Hearing on 11/18/2019: At the hearing on 11/18/2019 at 1:30 PM the Court will hear argument as to the Motion for Preliminary Injunction (dkt no. 8 ) and Motion to Dismiss (dkt no. 37) only. The Motion to Compel (dkt no. 63 ) is set for a separate hearing on 12/2/2019 at 1:30 PM. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (mklS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/12/2019) (Entered: 11/12/2019)	RECAP
	Nov. 12, 2019	Clerk's Notice
83	Nov. 18, 2019	Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim: Motion Hearing held on 11/18/2019 re 8 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by Kenyon Norbert and 37 MOTION to Dismiss DEFENDANTS NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFFS COMPLAINT. The Court heard oral argument on the motions and will issue a written order. (FTR Time: 1:49-2:29.) Attorney for Plaintiff: Yolanda Huang. Attorneys for Defendants: Sabrina Berdux; Kaitlyn Murphy. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (mklS, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 11/18/2019) Modified on 3/4/2020: Matter transcribed by Peggy Schuerger (AdHoc Reporting). (rjdS, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 11/18/2019)	RECAP
	Nov. 18, 2019	Motion Hearing
84	Nov. 19, 2019	PDF with attached Audio File. Court Date & Time [ 11/18/2019 1:49:22 PM ]. File Size [ 19080 KB ]. Run Time [ 00:39:45 ]. (courtspeak). (Entered: 11/19/2019)	RECAP
85	Nov. 26, 2019	JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT filed by Montrail Brackens, Michael Brown, Armando Carlos, Marshall Harris, Troy McAllister, Kenyon Norbert, Jose Poot. (Huang, Yolanda) (Filed on 11/26/2019) (Entered: 11/26/2019)	RECAP
86	Dec. 2, 2019	Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim: Motion Hearing held on 12/2/2019 re 63 MOTION to Compel Defendants San Francisco Sheriff's Department to Provide Access for Discovery filed by Plaintiffs. Further Case Management Conference held on 12/2/2019. The Court continued the hearing on the motion to compel. The Court advises plaintiffs to provide additional information regarding the scientific validity of the proposed plan and the manner in which the data and evidence will be used either by scientific researchers or by other sources who seek to subpoena the materials for use in ongoing criminal cases or other ongoing civil cases. The Court advises plaintiffs to provide copies of any studies submitted for approval with any institutional review board regarding testing of human subjects and, to the extent that scientific researchers have sought funding from other sources, copies of any grant proposals. The Court advises defendants to provide information regarding the initial screening of inmates, the regularity and scope of checkups, and the manner in which inmates can seek their medical records. The Court notes that any consent form must be mutual, i.e., the parties must have equal access to any evidence obtained. Further Case Management Conference set for 1/7/2020 01:30 PM in San Francisco, Courtroom C, 15th Floor. Further Motion Hearing set for 1/7/2020 01:30 PM in San Francisco, Courtroom C, 15th Floor before Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim.(FTR Time: 1:33-1:57; 1:58-1:59.) Plaintiff Attorney: Yolanda Huang. Defendant Attorney: Sabrina Berdux. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (mklS, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 12/2/2019) (Entered: 12/02/2019)	RECAP

show / hide docket entries

Case Details

State / Territory:

California

Case Type(s):

Jail Conditions

Special Collection(s):

Multi-LexSum (in sample)

Key Dates

Filing Date: May 20, 2019

Case Ongoing: Yes

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Prisoners in County Jails in San Francisco. Class 1 ("Outdoor Class") was defined as all inmates who are pretrial detainees and have been incarcerated in San Francisco Jail 3 located in San Bruno, CA, at any point during the time period May 20, 2017 to present, and who do not have outdoor access as part of their incarceration at San Francisco County Jail 3. Class 2 ("Confinement Class") was defined as all inmates who are pretrial detainees and have been incarcerated in County Jail 3 located in San Bruno, CA, at any point during the same period as Class A, and who have fewer than one hour per 24 hour period of time out of their cells. Subclass 1 ("Confinement Subclass 1") was defined as all inmates in the Confinement Class who are classified by the San Francisco County Sheriff's Office in general population housing. Subclass 2 ("Confinement Subclass 2") was defined as all inmates in the Confinement Class who are classified by the San Francisco County Sheriff's Office in administrative segregation housing.

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Granted

Defendants

County

City and County of San Francisco

San Francisco County Sheriff's Department

Defendant Type(s):

Corrections

Facility Type(s):

Government-run

Case Details

Causes of Action:

42 U.S.C. § 1983

Constitutional Clause(s):

Cruel and Unusual Punishment

Due Process

Due Process: Substantive Due Process

Other Dockets:

Northern District of California 3:19-cv-02724

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 20-15341

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 20-15449

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 24-04789

Available Documents:

Any published opinion

Complaint (any)

Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief

Trial Court Docket

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff OR Mixed

Relief Granted:

Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement

Preliminary injunction / Temp. restraining order

Source of Relief:

Litigation

Content of Injunction:

Preliminary relief denied

Preliminary relief granted

Amount Defendant Pays: $636,701.46

Issues

General/Misc.:

Conditions of confinement

Totality of conditions

Jails, Prisons, Detention Centers, and Other Institutions:

Administrative segregation

Solitary confinement/Supermax (conditions or process)

Recommended Citation

Case Summary of Norbert v. San Francisco Sheriff's Department, Civil Rights Litig. Clearinghouse, http://www.dev.clearinghouse.net/case/17388/ (last updated 2/22/2025).

Case: Norbert v. San Francisco Sheriff's Department

3:19-cv-02724 | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California

Case Summary

Related Cases

People

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Docket

Case Details