Jones v. Mayberg et al

Filing 32

ORDER OPENING DISCOVERY for Limited Purspose of Identifying Does 2 and 3 and REQUIRING Plaintiff to Identify Documents within Twenty Days signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 5/31/2013. (Sant Agata, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
OSCAR W. JONES,

CASE NO. 1:10-cv-01530-SKO PC

9
Plaintiff,

ORDER OPENING DISCOVERY FOR
LIMITED PURPOSE OF IDENTIFYING DOES
2 AND 3 AND REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO
IDENTIFY DOCUMENTS WITHIN TWENTY
DAYS

10
v.
11
STEPHEN MAYBERG, et al.,
12
Defendants.

(Docs. 30 and 31)

13
Discovery Deadline: 10/01/2013
Deadline to Identify Documents: 20 days

14
/
15
16

Plaintiff Oscar W. Jones, a former civil detainee proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis,

17

filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on August 25, 2010. At this juncture, this

18

action is proceeding against Defendants Doe 2 and Doe 3 for violating the Due Process Clause of

19

the United States Constitution, relating to the failure to transport Plaintiff for medical treatment

20

while he was at Coalinga State Hospital.

21

Although the use of Doe defendants is generally disfavored, the law of this Circuit requires

22

that Plaintiff be provided with “an opportunity through discovery to identify the unknown

23

defendants, unless it is clear that discovery would not uncover the identities. . . .’” Wakefield v.

24

Thompson, 177 F.3d 1160, 1163 (9th Cir. 1999) (quoting Gillespie v. Civiletti, 629 E.2d 637, 642

25

(9th Cir. 1980)). Therefore, on April 29, 2013, the Court ordered Plaintiff to file a status report

26

regarding how much time he needs to conduct discovery to ascertain the identities of Does 2 and 3.

27

Plaintiff filed a response on May 15, 2013.

28

///
1

1

The Court declines to grant Plaintiff a year or more to conduct discovery, as requested.

2

Plaintiff filed this action and he is required to prosecute it with due diligence. To that end, even

3

though Plaintiff is proceeding pro se, the identification of the Doe defendants must be prioritized and

4

a year or more is an unreasonably long period of time.

5

The Court will open discovery for a period of four months. Given that Plaintiff is limited to

6

seeking discovery pursuant to Rule 45 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure at this juncture, he

7

is entitled to the issuance of subpoenas duces tecum under Rule 45. Plaintiff shall notify the Court

8

within twenty days which documents need to be produced by the California Department of

9

Corrections and Rehabilitation and/or Coalinga State Hospital to identify Does 2 and 3. Plaintiff

10

must be as specific as possible in terms of the document names. Upon receipt of this information,

11

the Court will direct the United States Marshal to serve the subpoenas duces tecum.

12

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

13

1.

14

Discovery shall be open until October 1, 2013, for the limited purpose of obtaining
documents necessary to identify Doe 2 and Doe 3; and

15

2.

16

Within twenty (20) days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff shall identify
the documents necessary to identify Doe 2 and Doe 3.

17
18

IT IS SO ORDERED.

19

Dated:
i0d3h8

May 31, 2013

/s/ Sheila K. Oberto
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2