Parker v. Adu-Tutu et al

Filing 96

ORDER the reference to the Magistrate Judge is withdrawn as to Plainitff's Motion for Reconsideration 92 . Within 15 days from the date of this Order, Defendant must file a response. Within 10 days of receipt of Defendant's response, Plaintiff may file a reply. Signed by Judge G Murray Snow on 3/22/12. (TLJ)

1

WO

JDN

2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

Mark Steven Parker,

10

Plaintiff,

11

vs.

12

Adu-Tutu, et al.,
Defendants.

13
14

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. CV-10-2747-PHX-GMS (ECV)
ORDER

15

Plaintiff Mark Steven Parker brought this civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983

16

against Dr. Rowe, Facility Health Administrator at the Arizona Department of Corrections

17

(Doc. 26).1 Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion for Reconsideration (Doc. 92).

18

Plaintiff suffers from chronic gout, and in his Second Amended Complaint, Plaintiff

19

alleged that Defendant was deliberately indifferent to this serious medical need when he

20

repeatedly denied other physician’s requests to provide Plaintiff a medically prescribed “no

21

meat” diet (Doc. 26 at 7, 9-11, 20).

22

Plaintiff filed a Motion for Preliminary Injunction for an Order directing Defendant

23

and any persons acting in concert with him to provide Plaintiff a “no meat” diet (Doc. 29).

24

In response, Defendant asserted that Plaintiff’s request for a vegan diet had been approved

25

and he began receiving a vegan diet in November 2011 (Doc. 46). The Court found that

26

because Plaintiff did not file a reply and dispute Defendant’s assertion, his request for a

27
28

1

Upon screening, the Court dismissed seven other named Defendants (Doc. 35).

1

preliminary injunction was moot (Doc. 73).

2

Plaintiff now moves for reconsideration of the Order denying his preliminary

3

injunction request (Doc. 92). Plaintiff asserts that he was denied access to legal and writing

4

materials and to photocopy services, which in turn led to a delay in the Court’s receipt of his

5

reply. Plaintiff states that the Court ruled on the Motion for Preliminary Injunction without

6

consideration of his reply even though the reply was filed before the date of the Court’s

7

Order (id. at 3). In his reply and in his Motion for Reconsideration, Plaintiff avers that he

8

has not received a vegan diet since November 2011 (id. at 4).

9

The Court will direct Defendant to file a response to the Motion for Reconsideration.

10

See LRCiv 7.2(g)(2) (no response to a motion for reconsideration may be filed unless ordered

11

by the Court). Plaintiff may file a reply within 10 days of receipt of Defendant’s response.

12

IT IS ORDERED:

13

(1) The reference to the Magistrate Judge is withdrawn as to Plaintiff’s Motion for

14
15
16

Reconsideration (Doc. 92).
(2) Within 15 days from the date of this Order, Defendant must file a response to
Plaintiff’s Motion for Reconsideration.

17

(3) Within 10 days of receipt of Defendant’s response, Plaintiff may file a reply.

18

DATED this 22nd day of March, 2012.

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-