Gilbert v. Herbert et al

Filing 67

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 6/30/2010 DENYING as unnecessary, pltf's 55 motion for an extension of time; and DENYING pltf's 53 motion to compel. (Yin, K)

(PC) Gilbert v. Herbert et al

Doc. 67

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 Plaintiff's motion was filed on February 25, 2010. Pursuant to the court's November 23, 2009, scheduling order, discovery was to be complete by March 22, 2010, and any motions to compel were due within 60 days of this cut-off date. Because plaintiff's motion was filed even before the discovery cut-off date, it is timely. Defendants do not argue otherwise. Therefore, plaintiff's motion for an extension of time nunc pro tunc (Doc. 55) is unnecessary and will be denied as such. 1
Dockets.Justia.com
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FRED WAYNE GILBERT, Plaintiff, vs. SUSAN HUBBARD, et al., Defendants. /

No. CIV S-09-0209-CMK-P

ORDER

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the court is plaintiff's motion to compel (Doc. 53).1 Plaintiff seeks an order compelling further responses to discovery requests he served on defendants. Plaintiff does not, however, identify which specific discovery responses provided by defendants are inadequate or why. Therefore, it is impossible for the court to evaluate plaintiff's motion.

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

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. unnecessary; and 2. Plaintiff's motion to compel (Doc. 53) is denied. Plaintiff's motion for an extension of time (Doc. 55) is denied as

DATED: June 30, 2010 ______________________________________ CRAIG M. KELLISON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2