Perez v. Padilla

Filing 62

ORDER denying 61 Motion for discovery signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 8/2/2017. (Lundstrom, T)

1
2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

3

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

4
5

Plaintiff,

6
7
8

11

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO
FOR DISCOVERY

v.
(ECF NO. 61)

R. PADILLA,
Defendant.

9
10

Case No. 1:14-cv-01730-DAD-EPG (PC)

JOSEPH PEREZ,

Joseph Perez ("Plaintiff") is a former state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma
pauperis with this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

12

On July 31, 2017, Plaintiff filed a motion for discovery. (ECF No. 61). Plaintiff appears

13

to be attempting to take discovery, which he wants to present at his “court day” on October 2,

14

2017. Plaintiff also mentions that he wants damages for “the 180 days they gave [him] at what it

15

cost[s] to house an inmate monthly.”

16
17

Plaintiff’s motion will be denied. Discovery has not yet been opened (ECF No. 5, p. 4),
and Plaintiff has not provided a reason why he needs to take early discovery.

18

Additionally, Plaintiff’s motion appears to be based on the belief that Plaintiff’s trial is set

19

for October 2, 2017. It is not. On October 2, 2017, the Court will be holding an Initial

20

Scheduling Conference. The Court will not be taking evidence regarding the claim in this case at

21

the Conference. Instead, the Court will be setting a schedule for this case. The Court will also

22

discuss discovery with the parties.

23
24
25
26

Accordingly, based on the foregoing, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for
discovery is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

August 2, 2017

/s/
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

27
28
1

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2