Wilson v. Wever et al

Filing 37

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 9/29/10 denying 25 Motion. (Dillon, M)

(PC) Wilson v. Wever et al

Doc. 37

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 /// 1
Dockets.Justia.com

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

LEE WILSON, Plaintiff, vs. SANDRA LEE WEVER, et al., Defendants. /

No. CIV S-09-2191-LKK-CMK-P

ORDER

Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the court is plaintiff motion entitled "Request for Order for Sanctions; Contempt Compliance; and Default Judgment" (Doc. 25). In his one-page motion, plaintiff states as follows: Comes now the Plaintiff in the above entitled action hereby asks the court to order Mary David a defendant to comply with and complete the enclosed interrogatory that was mailed to her on 10/20/09. That Ms. David be held in contempt and sanctions issued for non-compliance. And Ms. David be ordered to appear. Finally, that a default be entered against Defendant Mary David who was duly served by the sheriff on 10/13/09 with a summons and complaint and who has failed to respond.

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

It appears by this request that plaintiff is seeking: (1) an order compelling defendant David to produce discovery responses; (2) an order for sanctions against defendant David; and (3) a default judgment against defendant David. A review of the docket reflects that the court has not yet determined that service of the complaint is appropriate. As such, no defendant has been property served pursuant to this court's authorization. Because defendant David has not been served, any discovery is premature and default is not appropriate. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion (Doc. 25) is denied.

DATED: September 29, 2010 ______________________________________ CRAIG M. KELLISON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2