Haney v. Epstein et al

Filing 33

ORDER Denying Motion To Compel Initial Discovery Responses As Moot (Doc. 31 ), signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 7/11/2012. (Fahrney, E)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
7
8

BRUCE PATRICK HANEY,

9

Plaintiff,

10
11

CASE NO. 1:10-cv-01506-LJO-SKO PC
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO COMPEL
INITIAL DISCOVERY RESPONSES AS
MOOT

v.
L. EPTSTEIN, et al.,

12

(Doc. 31)
Defendants.
/

13
14

Plaintiff Bruce Patrick Haney is a former state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil action

15

for violation of his rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action for damages is proceeding on

16

Plaintiff’s First Amendment retaliation claim against Defendants Epstein and Gonzales.

17

On May 16, 2012, Plaintiff filed a motion seeking to compel Defendants to respond to his

18

interrogatories, request for admissions, and request for production of documents, which he served

19

on March 21, 2012. On May 22, 2012, Defendants filed an opposition to the motion, arguing that

20

it should be denied as moot because they served their discovery responses on May 16, 2012.

21

Plaintiff did not file a reply.

22
23

In as much as Plaintiff’s motion sought to compel initial responses which were served on
May 16, 2012, Plaintiff’s motion is HEREBY ORDERED DENIED as moot.

24
25

IT IS SO ORDERED.

26

Dated:
ie14hj

July 11, 2012

/s/ Sheila K. Oberto
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

27
28
1