Rodriguez v. Pennington et al

Filing 31

ORDER denying 29 Motion to Compel without prejudice. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jerome T. Kearney on 8/2/10. (bkp)

Download PDF
Rodriguez v. Pennington et al Doc. 31 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION FREDERICK DANIEL RODRIGUEZ, ADC #123618 v. BRUCE PENNINGTON, et al. ORDER This matter is before the Court on plaintiff's motion to compel (Doc. No. 29). Defendants have filed a response to the motion (Doc. No. 30). In his motion, plaintiff states, "would like for the courts to allow me a motion to compel against the defendants...on the last (2) two forms that I've sent to the Docoments (sic) 16-1-3and all last actions taken." In their response, defendants state they are unclear about plaintiff's request in his motion, stating document 16 is defendants' answer to the complaint, and does not require a further response from defendants. Furthermore, defendants state they have responded to all required pleadings. The Court is unclear about the plaintiff's request, and finds no pleadings in which a response is required from defendants. In addition, the Court does not find any discovery requests pending, and plaintiff does not refer to such in his motion. Therefore, plaintiff's motion will be denied without prejudice. Accordingly, IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that plaintiff's motion to compel (Doc. No. 29) is hereby DENIED without prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED this 3rd day of August, 2010. 4:10CV00147SWW/JTK DEFENDANTS PLAINTIFF _____________________________________ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?