Scott v. Palmer et al

Filing 121

ORDER Denying 101 Motion to Compel, Without Prejudice, signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 2/22/13. (Gonzalez, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9

FLOYD SCOTT,

10

CASE NO. 1:09-cv-01329-LJO-SKO PC
Plaintiff,

11

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO COMPEL,
WITHOUT PREJUDICE

v.
(Doc. 101)

12

J. PALMER, et al.,

13

Defendants.
/

14
15

Plaintiff Floyd Scott, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action pursuant

16

to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on July 29, 2009. Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion to compel, filed

17

on October 29, 2012. Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a). Defendants filed an opposition on January 10, 2013,

18

Plaintiff filed a reply on February 8, 2013, and the motion has been submitted upon the record.

19

Local Rule 230(l).

20

As set forth in the order issued by the Honorable Lawrence J. O’Neill on February 21, 2013,

21

the filing of Defendants’ vexatious litigant motion on June 22, 2012, had the effect of staying this

22

action pending resolution of the motion, which occurred on December 21, 2012. Local Rule 151(b);

23

Cal. Civ. Proc. § 391.6 (West 2013). As a result, Defendants were not obligated to respond to

24

Plaintiff’s discovery requests during the pendency of their motion, and Plaintiff’s motion to compel

25

was prematurely filed. In addition, Plaintiff is not entitled to reasonable expenses incurred in

26

bringing his motion to compel. Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(5)(A).

27

///

28

///
1

1
2

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion to compel, filed on October 29, 2012, is HEREBY
ORDERED DENIED as premature.

3
4

IT IS SO ORDERED.

5

Dated:
ie14hj

February 22, 2013

/s/ Sheila K. Oberto
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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