Nailing v. Fosterer et al

Filing 95

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 1/16/2013 DENYING plaintiff's 94 Motion to Compel production of documents. (Marciel, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

XAVIER DMETRI NAILING,

12
13
14
15
16
17

No. 2:09-CV-2475-MCE-CMK

Plaintiff,
vs.

ORDER

B.D. FOSTERER, et al.,
Defendants.
/
Plaintiff, a former prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action

18

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the court is plaintiff’s document entitled “Notice

19

Motion of Plaintiff’s Request of All Central Files File H57864, P08725 and G25239 by

20

Defendants’ Counsel Daniel Ikeri; Request for Document Production” (Doc. 94) To the extent

21

this document is a request for discovery, plaintiff is advised that discovery requests should not be

22

filed except in the context of a motion to compel. To the extent plaintiff’s document is a motion

23

to compel, it is procedurally defective. In the court’s August 8, 2012, scheduling order, plaintiff

24

was informed that this case was proceeding under the local rules as a civil pro se (non-prisoner)

25

case because plaintiff is no longer incarcerated. Plaintiff was also informed that all motions

26

pertaining to discovery must be noticed to be heard by December 14, 2012. Plaintiff’s motion
1

1

does not notice any hearing date whatsoever. Because plaintiff’s motion was not noticed for a

2

hearing prior to or on December 14, 2012, plaintiff has failed to comply with the court’s August

3

8, 2012, order.

4
5

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion (Doc. 94) is
denied.

6
7
8
9

DATED: January 16, 2013
______________________________________
CRAIG M. KELLISON
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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