Wright v. Shannon et al

Filing 89

ORDER Denying Plaintiff's 78 Motion to Compel as Untimely signed by Magistrate Judge Sandra M. Snyder on 09/02/2011. (Flores, E)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9

RAYMOND WRIGHT,

10

CASE NO. 1:05-cv-01485-SKO PC

Plaintiff,

11

v.

12

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
TO COMPEL AS UNTIMELY

RUMBLES, et al.,

(ECF Nos. 78, 80, )
13

Defendants.
/

14
15

Plaintiff Raymond Wright (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

16

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action is proceeding on the

17

second amended complaint, filed October 21, 2006, against Defendants Rumbles and Doe for

18

excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment. On September 14, 2010, the discovery and

19

scheduling order issued in this action setting the discovery cut-off date as May 14, 2011. (ECF No.

20

63.) The discovery and scheduling order informed the parties that “the completion of all discovery,

21

including filing motions to compel, shall be 05/14/2011.” (Id. at 2:15-16.) Plaintiff filed a motion

22

to compel on June 3, 2011. (ECF No. 78.) The proof of service attached to Plaintiff’s motion to

23

compel is dated May 27, 2011. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion to compel is untimely and is

24

HEREBY DENIED.

25
26
27
28

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

September 2, 2011

/s/ Sandra M. Snyder
1

1

icido3

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2