Wheeler v. Alison et al

Filing 212

ORDER Regarding Plaintiff's 203 Request for Relief; ORDER to SHOW CAUSE Why Sanctions should not be Imposed on Defendants for Failure to Comply with Discovery Order signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 1/21/2015. (Sant Agata, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9
10
11

ERIC WHEELER,

12
13
14
15

Plaintiff,
vs.
ALISON, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

1:12cv00861 LJO DLB PC
ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S
REQUEST FOR RELIEF
(Document 203)
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY
SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT BE IMPOSED
ON DEFENDANTS FOR FAILURE TO
COMPLY WITH DISCOVERY ORDER

16
17
18
19

Plaintiff Eric Wheeler (“Plaintiff”) is a prisoner in the custody of the California
Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (“CDCR”). Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in

20

forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action proceeds on

21

Plaintiff’s complaint, filed on May 25, 2012, on the following claims: (1) excessive force in

22

violation of the Eighth Amendment against Defendants Duck, Murrieta and Lowder; (2) failure

23

to protect in violation of the Eighth Amendment against Defendants Duck, Murrietta, Lowder,

24

Loftis and Alison; and (3) deliberate indifference to a serious medical in violation of the Eighth

25

Amendment against Defendants Ross, Mui, Neubarth and Ancheta.

26
27

On December 15, 2014, the Court issued a ruling on Plaintiff’s motion to compel. In the
order, the Court ordered that if Defendants had not produced documents that they agreed to

28
1

1
2

provide in the September 11, 2014, letter, they had thirty (30) days from the date of service of
the order to do so.

3
4

On January 20, 2015, the Court received a motion from Plaintiff in which he states that
he has not yet received the documents. The motion was signed on January 13, 2015.1

5

Accordingly, Defendants are ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why sanctions should not
6
7
8
9

be imposed for failure to comply with the December 15, 2014, order. Defendants SHALL file a
response to this order within fourteen (14) days of the date of service.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

10

Dated:

11

January 21, 2015

/s/ Dennis

L. Beck

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1

The Court notes that Plaintiff signed the letter a day prior to deadline for the production of documents, and that
institutional mail can be delayed. However, given the nature of the discovery disputes in this action and the length
of time it has taken to resolve the disputes, the Court will not delay in issuing this order.
2