Durden v. CDCR et al

Filing 20

ORDER Denying Plaintiff's Motion to Compel 18 and ORDER Granting Plaintiff's Motion for Extension of Time to File an In Forma Pauperis Application 19 , signed by Chief Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 9/2/11. (Gonzalez, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

LARRY FRANCIS DURDEN,

11

Plaintiff,

12

v.

13
CDCR, et al.,
14
15

CASE NO.

1:11-cv-01019-AWI-GBC (PC)

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO
COMPEL AND ORDER GRANTING
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF
TIME TO FILE AN IN FORMA PAUPERIS
APPLICATION

Defendants.
/ (ECF Nos. 18 & 19)

16
17
18
19

ORDER
Plaintiff Larry Francis Durden (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this
civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed this action on June 6, 2011.

20
(ECF No. 1.) Plaintiff’s Complaint has not yet been screened by the Court.
21
22
23

Pending before the Court now are a Motion to Compel and a Motion for Extension
of Time to file an in forma pauperis application. (ECF Nos. 18 & 19.)

24

In the Motion to Compel, Plaintiff appears to be asking that the CDCR R. J.

25

Donovan Correctional Facility be required to produce a copy of Plaintiff’s trust account

26

statement. The Court notes that Plaintiff does not state that he has requested such

27

statement. Plaintiff states that the facility has not processed his 28 U.S.C. § 1915.

1

The Court can not determine what Plaintiff is claiming or what relief he is seeking.

2

The Court reminds Plaintiff that he must file an application to proceed in forma pauperis

3

in this action and that then, within sixty (60) days of the Order granting IFP status, Plaintiff

4
5

must submit a certified copy of his prison trust statement for the six month period

6

immediately preceding the filing of his Complaint. Plaintiff has not filed an application to

7

proceed in forma pauperis in this action.

8

At the present stage in the proceedings, a motion to compel is not the proper course

9

of action. General discovery has not been opened. Defendants have not been named nor

10

required to disclose anything. Under Rule 37 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a

11
12

motion to compel may be brought “[i]f a party fails to make a disclosure required by Rule

13

26(a)” or replies to a discovery request with an “evasive or incomplete disclosure, answer,

14

or response.” See Fed.R.Civ.P. 37(a). Therefore, Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel is DENIED.

15

Plaintiff’s pleading is titled Motion for Extension Time, however, it appears to be

16

asking about the status of a filing. Specifically, Plaintiff asks whether the Court has

17

received his application for in forma pauperis. (ECF No. 19.) Plaintiff states that he sent

18
it on August 25, 2011. The Court notes that it has not received an application to proceed
19
20
21
22
23
24

in forma pauperis in this action. The Court also notes that the current deadline for Plaintiff
to file an application is September 12, 2011. (ECF No. 17.)
The Court will grant Plaintiff one final extension of time to file his application to
proceed in forma pauperis.
Accordingly, the Court HEREBY ORDERS that

25
1.

Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel is DENIED;

2.

Plaintiff’s Motion for Extension is GRANTED;

26
27

1

3.

2

Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis is due no later than
October 1, 2011; and

3

4.

No further extensions of time will be given.

4
IT IS SO ORDERED.
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

Dated:
1j0bbc

September 2, 2011
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE