Roberts v. Cate et al

Filing 58

ORDER denying 57 Motion to Compel signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 06/29/11. (Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

TONY ROBERTS,

11
12

Plaintiff,

No. 2:08-cv-2624 KJN P

vs.

13

MATTHEW CATE, et al.,

14

Defendants.

15

ORDER
/

16

Plaintiff is proceeding without counsel. On June 22, 2011, the parties were

17

reminded that discovery closed on June 8, 2011, but that once the court issued a ruling on

18

defendants’ motion for protective order, plaintiff could renew his motion to extend the discovery

19

deadline. On June 27, 2011, plaintiff filed a motion to compel discovery responses, which

20

plaintiff signed on June 20, 2011, prior to the issuance of the June 22, 2011 order. Plaintiff’s

21

motion to compel is untimely and will be denied without prejudice to its renewal should the court

22

subsequently grant an extension of the discovery deadline. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that

23

plaintiff’s June 27, 2011 motion to compel (dkt. no. 57) is denied without prejudice.

24

DATED: June 29, 2011
_____________________________________
KENDALL J. NEWMAN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

25
26

robe2624.mtc