Strong v. Elliot

Filing 45

ORDER DENYING 43 Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Copies of Deposition Transcripts and ORDER GRANTING IN PART 44 Plaintiff's Second Motion for Extension of Time to File Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment, signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 2/13/2012. Opposition to Motion due within twenty-one (21) days. (Jessen, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12
13
14
15
16

GEORGE BERRY STRONG,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
KENNETH ELLIOTT,
)
)
Defendant.
)
)
_____________________________________ )

1:09-cv-00583-AWI-JLT (PC)
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO COMPEL
COPIES OF DEPOSITION TRANSCRIPTS
(Doc. 43)
ORDER GRANTING IN PART
PLAINTIFF'S SECOND MOTION TO
EXTEND TIME TO FILE OPPOSITION TO
MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

17
18

(Doc. 44)
Plaintiff is a prisoner proceeding pro se in a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §

19

1983. On January 10, 2012, the Court granted Plaintiff’s first request for an extension of time to

20

respond to the motion for summary judgment. (Doc. 42) After this, on February 10, 2012,

21

Plaintiff filed a motion compelling Defendants to provide him copies of “the deposition

22

transcript.” (Doc. 43) In particular, Plaintiff seeks full copies of each deposition transcript cited

23

by Defendant in his motion for summary judgment. Id. at 2. On February 10, 2012, Plaintiff filed

24

a second motion to extend time to file an opposition to Defendant's motion for summary

25

judgment. (Doc. 44)

26

As to Plaintiff’s motion to compel Defendant to provide him a copy of Plaintiff’s

27

deposition transcript, Plaintiff is advised that Defendant has no obligation to do so. Indeed, the

28

Defendant must purchase a copy of the transcript from the court reporter for his own use and to
1

1

provide one to Plaintiff, he would be required to purchase another copy. There is no justification

2

for requiring Defendant to fund Plaintiff’s litigation.

3

On the other hand, because it is a transcript of his own testimony1, the Court has no

4

understanding why Plaintiff feels that it is necessary to have the transcript before he files a

5

response to the motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff knows his own account of what

6

occurred without regard for his sworn statements. In any event, Plaintiff has failed to provide the

7

Court any explanation as to why he believes the transcript is necessary. Therefore, the motion to

8

compel Defendant to provide Plaintiff a copy of his deposition transcript is DENIED.2

9

Moreover, as noted above, Plaintiff fails to explain how not having the transcript has

10

impeded his ability to prepare his response to the motion. However, the Court will grant Plaintiff

11

one final extension of 21 days additional to file his opposition.

12

ORDER

13

Based upon the foregoing, the Court ORDERS:

14

1.

15
16

Plaintiff’s motion to compel Defendant to provide a him a copy of his deposition
transcript is DENIED;

2.

17

Plaintiff is granted 21 days from the date of service of this order in which to file
an opposition to the motion for summary judgment.

18

Plaintiff is advised that his failure to file an opposition to the motion for summary judgment in

19

the time frame set forth will result in the Court determining the motion upon the papers already

20

submitted and could result in a judgment terminating this litigation.

21

IT IS SO ORDERED.

22

Dated: February 13, 2012
9j7khi

/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

23
24
25
26
27

1

The only deposition transcript cited by Defendant in the motion for summary judgment is the testimony of
Plaintiff. (Doc. at 13-14)
2

28

This does not preclude Defendant from providing the requested copy and the Court strongly urges
Defendant to accommodate Plaintiff’s request if it is at all possible.

2