Trueman v. Hawaii, State of et al

Filing 35

ORDER, due to plaintiff's non-compliance with the time frame, this case is DISMISSED without prejudice, subject to any statute of limitations defense. Signed by Senior Judge Robert C Broomfield on 4/17/12. (DMT)

1

WO

2
3
4
5
6
7

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

James K. Trueman,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
Jason Johnson, Unknown Avena, )
and Unknown Molina,
)
)
Defendants.
)
)

No. CIV 09-2179-PHX-RCB
O R D E R

18
19

On March 13, 2012, this court allowed plaintiff pro se James

20

K. Trueman to “conduct limited discovery” within the parameters

21

enumerated in that order.

22

¶¶ (1)-(6).

23

service and filing of the written questions which that order

24

allowed.

25

previously indicated that it would, due to plaintiff’s non-

26

compliance with that time frame, this case is DISMISSED without

27

. . .

28

See Ord. (Doc. 34) at 3:5-26 - 4:5,

Plaintiff did not comply with the thirty day time for

See id. at 3:9-12, ¶ (2).

Consequently, as the court

1
2

prejudice, subject to any statute of limitations defense.
DATED this 17th day of April, 2012.

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

Copies to counsel of record and plaintiff pro se

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-

See id.