Crisp v. Wasco State Prison et al
ORDER Denying Plaintiff's 17 Request to Open Discovery; ORDER Resolving Plaintiff's Request for Status signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 12/04/2013. (Flores, E)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF=S
REQUEST TO OPEN DISCOVERY
ORDER RESOLVING PLAINTIFF’S
REQUEST FOR STATUS
WASCO STATE PRISON, et al.,
Obie Crisp ("Plaintiff") is a prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. ' 1983. Plaintiff filed the Complaint commencing this action on May
30, 2013. (Doc. 1.) On July 29, 2013, Plaintiff filed the First Amended Complaint, which
awaits the court’s requisite screening under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. (Doc. 13.)
On June 24, 2013, Plaintiff consented to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction in this action
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 636(c), and no other parties have made an appearance. (Doc. 5.)
Therefore, pursuant to Appendix A(k)(4) of the Local Rules of the Eastern District of
California, the undersigned shall conduct any and all proceedings in the case until such time as
reassignment to a District Judge is required. Local Rule Appendix A(k)(3).
On December 2, 2013, Plaintiff filed a request for the court to open discovery for this
Plaintiff also requests status of his motion for leave to file a late
Plaintiff requests a court order commencing discovery in this action. Plaintiff was
recently transferred to another correctional facility and expresses concern that the court has not
received his notice of change of address. Plaintiff also states that he is not aware of when
defendants were served.
Plaintiff is advised that the court received and filed his notice of change of address to
the California Health Care Facility on October 3, 2012. (Doc. 16.) Plaintiff is also advised that
the court will issue a scheduling order setting a schedule for discovery after the complaint has
been served and one of the defendants has filed an Answer to the complaint. At this stage of
the proceedings, Plaintiff’s complaint awaits the court’s requisite screening process. Service of
process shall not be initiated until the court has screened the complaint and finds that Plaintiff
states cognizable claims. Therefore, it is not time for discovery in this action, and Plaintiff’s
request to open discovery at this stage of the proceedings shall be denied.
REQUEST FOR STATUS
Plaintiff also requests the status of his motion for leave to file a late Government Claim.
Plaintiff is advised that his motion for leave to file a late Government Claim, filed on July 10,
2013, was denied by the court’s order of July 22, 2013. (Docs. 8, 11.) Plaintiff was served
with a copy of the July 22, 2013 order at his prior address-of-record at Wasco State Prison on
July 22, 2013. (Court Record.)
Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
December 2, 2013, is DENIED; and
Plaintiff’s request to open discovery at this stage of the proceedings, filed on
Plaintiff=s request for status of his motion for leave to file a late Government
Claim is RESOLVED by this order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
December 4, 2013
/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?