Valencia v. Kokor

Filing 93

ORDER Granting 86 Motion to Compel, signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 6/30/16. (Verduzco, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

DANIEL G. VALENCIA,

12

Plaintiff,

13

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT
KOKOR’S MOTION TO COMPEL

v.

14

No. 1:13-cv-01391 LJO DLB PC

KOKOR, et al.,

(Document 86)

15

Defendants.

16
17

Plaintiff Daniel G. Valencia (“Plaintiff”) is a California state prisoner proceeding pro se

18

in this civil action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The action is proceeding on Plaintiff’s Second

19

Amended Complaint for violation of the Eighth Amendment against Defendants Kokor and

20

Sundaram.
Discovery opened as to Defendant Kokor on February 17, 2016. Pursuant to the

21
22

Discovery and Scheduling Order, initial disclosures were to be exchanged by April 4, 2016.

23

After the Court granted an extension, exhaustion-based motions are currently due by July 17,

24

2016.

25

On June 2, 2016, the Court issued Findings and Recommendations to grant Defendant

26

Sundaram’s motion to dismiss with leave to amend. The Findings and Recommendations are

27

pending.

28

///
1

1

On May 12, 2016, Defendant Kokor filed a motion to compel Plaintiff to (1) provide his

2

initial disclosures; and (2) respond to exhaustion-based discovery. Defendant Kokor also asked

3

for the imposition of sanctions in the amount of $382.50. Plaintiff filed a late opposition on June

4

13, 2016. Defendant filed a reply on June 20, 2016, and withdrew his request to compel

5

exhaustion-based discovery and impose sanctions.1 The motion is therefore ready for decision

6

pursuant to Local Rule 230(l).

7

DISCUSSION
Pursuant to the Court’s February 17, 2016, Discovery and Scheduling Order, the parties

8
9

were ordered to exchange initial disclosures by April 4, 2016. On April 4, 2016, Defendant

10

Kokor filed a statement with the Court indicating that he provided Plaintiff with his initial

11

disclosures.

12
13

Plaintiff, however, has not provided his initial disclosures to Defendant Kokor. Doering
Decl. ¶ 2. Plaintiff’s opposition does not address his failure.

14

Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Defendant Kokor’s motion to compel. Plaintiff must

15

provide Defendant Kokor with his initial disclosures within twenty-one (21) days of the date of

16

service of this order. Plaintiff’s failure to comply with this order will result in the imposition of

17

sanctions.

18
19

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20

Dated:

/s/ Dennis

June 30, 2016

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

L. Beck

1

Defendant Kokor has received responses from Plaintiff.

2