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)

Download PDF
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

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?