Allen, Jr v. Christianson et al

Filing 57

ORDER Denying Plaintiff's Request For Order Of Disclosure Of Deposition Recording Method And Overruling Objection To Irregularity In Notice Of Deposition Nunc Pro Tunc (Doc. 56 ), signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 4/16/2014. (Fahrney, E)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

COLUMBUS ALLEN, JR.,

12

Plaintiff,
v.

13
14

CHEUNG,

Case No. 1:09-cv-00930-AWI-JLT (PC)
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST
FOR ORDER OF DISCLOSURE OF
DEPOSITION RECORDING METHOD AND
OVERRULING OBJECTION TO
IRREGULARITY IN NOTICE OF
DEPOSITION NUNC PRO TUNC

Defendant.

15

(Doc. 56)

16
17

Plaintiff, Columbus Allen Jr. II, is a pre-trial detainee proceeding pro se and in forma

18

pauperis in this civil action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1986. Plaintiff filed this action on May 28,

19

2009 (Doc. 1) and is proceeding on his claims in the First Amended Complaint (Doc. 15) against

20

Defendant Cheung for denial of dental care in violation of the Eighth Amendment between

21

September 27, 2008 and January 3, 2009 (Docs. 31, 34). On April 11, 2014, Plaintiff filed a

22

"Request for Order of Disclosure of Deposition Recording Method and Objection to Irregularity

23

in Notice of Deposition." (Doc. 56.)1

24

Rule 30(b)(3) requires that the method of recording be stated in a deposition notice.

25

Plaintiff objects that Defendant's notice of his deposition did not state the recording method to be

26

used and requested an order disclosing as much. (Doc. 56, pp. 1-2.) Indeed, Defendants'

27
28

1

This motion is being ruled on despite insufficient lapse of time for Defendant to have responded. Defendant will
not be prejudiced as the motion is being denied.

1

1

deposition notice, which Plaintiff attached as Exhibit "A" to his motion, does not state the

2

recording method. However, the Discovery and Scheduling Order specified that "defendants may

3

depose plaintiff and any other witness confined in a prison upon condition that, at least fourteen

4

(14) days before such a deposition, defendants serve all parties with the notice required by

5

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(b)(1)." (Doc. 43, 1:25-27.) Thus, Defendant was not required

6

to include the recording method he intended to use in the notice of Plaintiff's deposition. Thus,

7

good cause exists to deny Plaintiff's motion.

8
9
10

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's "Request for Order of Disclosure
of Deposition Recording Method and Objection to Irregularity in Notice of Deposition," filed
April 11, 2014 (Doc. 56), is DENIED and any objections stated therein are OVERRULED.

11
12
13
14

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

April 16, 2014

/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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