(PC) Ramos v. Mayfield et al
ORDER REQUIRING Defendant Mayfield to Respond to Plaintiff's 77 Discovery Requests and DENYING Plaintiff's 77 Motion to Substitute Without Prejudice, signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 1/17/2023. (Marrujo, C)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
LEOBARDO ERIC RAMOS,
MAYFIELD, et al.,
Case No. 1:21-cv-01036-ADA-EPG (PC)
ORDER REQUIRING DEFENDANT
MAYFIELD TO RESPOND TO
PLAINTIFF’S DISCOVERY REQUESTS
AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION TO SUBSTITUTE WITHOUT
(ECF No. 77)
Leobardo Ramos (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma
pauperis in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This case is proceeding
on Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment excessive force claim against defendant Mayfield and
defendant Doe. (ECF Nos. 10 & 21).
On January 13, 2023, Plaintiff filed a document titled “motion to substitute the named
individuals in place of Defendant DOE.” (ECF No. 77). However, Plaintiff does not ask the
Court to substitute a named individual in place of Defendant Doe or identify defendant Doe.
Instead, he includes discovery requests so that he can identify “about 4-5 people.” (Id. at 1).
Accordingly, the Court will direct defendant Mayfield to file a response to the discovery
requests. Additionally, as Plaintiff is requesting discovery from defendant Mayfield and not
asking the Court to substitute a named individual in place of defendant Doe, the Court will
deny Plaintiff’s motion to substitute without prejudice.
The Court notes that if Plaintiff needs additional time to file a motion to substitute the
named individual in place of defendant Doe, Plaintiff should file a motion for an extension of
The Court also notes that this case is only proceeding against one Doe defendant who
allegedly used force on Plaintiff during the same incident as defendant Mayfield. (ECF Nos.
12 & 21). If Plaintiff files a motion to substitute, it is this defendant that Plaintiff must identify.
Accordingly, based on the foregoing, IT IS ORDERED that:
1. Defendant Mayfield has thirty days from the date of service of this order to
serve Plaintiff with responses to the discovery requests included in Plaintiff’s
motion to substitute (ECF No. 77).
2. Plaintiff’s motion to substitute (ECF No. 77) is denied, without prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
January 17, 2023
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?