Bradford v. Marchak

Filing 295

ORDER Regarding Plaintiff's Motions to Strike 288 , 289 , 292 , 293 and Plaintiff's Motion to Compel 291 , signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 4/17/2018: Motions are DENIED. (Hellings, J)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

RAYMOND ALFORD BRADFORD,
Plaintiff,

12
13
14
15

v.
M. MARCHAK, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17
18

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 1:14-cv-01689-LJO-BAM (PC)
ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONS
TO STRIKE (ECF Nos. 288, 289, 292, 293) AND
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPEL (ECF No.
291)

Plaintiff Raymond Alford Bradford is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis

19

in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This case proceeds on Plaintiff’s second

20

amended complaint against Defendants Marchak, Grewal, Depovic, and Clausell for the unnecessary

21

and wanton infliction of pain in violation of the Eighth Amendment. (ECF No. 21.)

22

In the Court’s orders issued on April 2, 2018 (ECF No. 266) and April 16, 2018 (ECF No.

23

287), Plaintiff was informed that future repetitive, misnamed, overlapping, and otherwise harassing

24

filings would be summarily denied.

25

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s four motions to strike are denied. (ECF Nos. 288, 289, 292, 293). The

26

fact that Plaintiff disagrees with Defendants’ arguments or defenses is not sufficient grounds to strike

27

their filings. The Court will not further entertain such motions to strike, and any future such motion

28

will be summarily denied.
1

1

Further, Plaintiff’s motion to compel and for sanctions against Defendant Marchak (ECF No.

2

291) is repetitive and duplicative of his previous motions addressed by the Court’s April 16, 2018

3

order, and is denied.

4
5
6
7

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Barbara

April 17, 2018

A. McAuliffe

_

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2