Watts v. Ramos, et al

Filing 38

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 8/10/2011 ORDERING that plaintiff's 35 motion to compel is DENIED. (Duong, D)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

TIMOTHY WATTS,

12

No. CIV S-09-1515-KJM-CMK-P

Plaintiff,

13

vs.

14

R. RAMOS, et al.,

15

ORDER

Defendants.

16

/

17

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant

18

to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the court is plaintiff’s motion to compel (Doc. 35). It is

19

not clear whether plaintiff seeks an order compelling initial responses to discovery requests or

20

further responses. This is because plaintiff does not state the dates discovery was served,

21

whether defendants responded, and, if so, how responses are inadequate. Absent this basic

22

information, the court cannot evaluate whether relief is warranted.

23

///

24

///

25

///

26

///
1

1
2

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion to compel (Doc.
35) is denied.

3
4
5
6

DATED: August 10, 2011
______________________________________
CRAIG M. KELLISON
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2