Williams v. Anderson

Filing 48

ORDER Denying Plaintiff's Motion To Compel Without Prejudice (ECF No. 47 ), signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 3/18/2014. (Fahrney, E)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

SYLESTER WILLIAMS,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

v.
SERGEANT R. ANDERSON, et al.,

15

Defendant.

16

Case No.: 1:10-cv-01250-SAB (PC)
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
TO COMPEL WITHOUT PREJUDICE
[ECF No. 47]

Plaintiff Sylester Williams is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action

17
18

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

19

Now pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion to compel, filed March 13, 2014.

20

Plaintiff contends that defense counsel has failed to respond to Plaintiff’s interrogatories and

21

“discovery documents.” Plaintiff’s motion shall be denied.
Plaintiff’s motion is deficient. As Plaintiff was advised in the Court’s First Informational

22
23

Order issued July 14, 2010, if a “response to discovery is unsatisfactory, the party seeking discovery

24

may file a motion to compel discovery, including a copy of the discovery propounded and the

25

response thereto.” (ECF No. 3 at 5:2-4.) In this instance, Plaintiff has failed to attach a copy of the

26

///

27

///

28

///
1

1

discovery propounded on the defendants for which he claims no response has been submitted.

2

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion to compel is DENIED without prejudice.

3
4
5
6

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

March 18, 2014
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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