Hamilton v. Hart et al

Filing 98

ORDER GRANTING 97 Request to Clarify Discovery Order and Amending Order After Hearing re Discovery Issues signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 11/23/2016. (Jessen, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12
13
14
15

Case No. 1:10-cv-00272-DAD-EPG-PC

DENNIS L. HAMILTON,
Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING REQUEST TO
CLARIFY DISCOVERY ORDER AND
AMENDING ORDER AFTER HEARING
RE: DISCOVERY ISSUES

vs.
JOHN HART, et al.,

(ECF No. 97)

Defendants.

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

Plaintiff Dennis Hamilton is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis
with this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On November 14, 2016, the Court
issued an order regarding various discovery issues that the parties raised at a scheduling
conference. (ECF No. 95.) Among other things, the Court narrowed the scope of two of
Plaintiff’s discovery requests and instructed Defendants to respond to the narrowed requests.
On November 22, 2016, Plaintiff filed a request to clarify the discovery order, asking for two
changes to the discovery ordered by the Court.
Specifically, Plaintiff asks that the order instructing Defendants to identify which
individuals escorted him from administrative segregation to reflect that he was moved from
building B1-114 to building B2-115, rather than buildings B114 and D2115, as the order

1

1

currently instructs. In addition, the Court previously instructed Defendant Bogle to respond to

2

an interrogatory asking “In your medical training, is it appropriate to decontaminate an inmate

3

who has been pepper sprayed without a shower?” Plaintiff asks that the interrogatory reflect

4

Defendant Bogle’s medical training before the date of the incident in question.

5

Plaintiff’s request is GRANTED. Defendants shall provide the requested information to

6

Plaintiff within 30 days of the date of this Order. If Defendants have already served discovery

7

responses on Plaintiff pursuant to the Order After Hearing re: Discovery Issues (ECF No. 95),

8

they may supplement their responses to reflect the clarified requests within 30 days.

9
10
11

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

November 23, 2016

/s/
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2