Milliken v. Lightfield et al
Filing
67
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge John F. Moulds on 9/28/12 ORDERING that The clerk of the court is ordered to forward the subpoena, a copy of this order,a copy of the written deposition questions (pages 1-4 of document # 59 ), and a copy of the w ritten cross-examination questions 61 to Sergio Soto; Mr. Soto shall return the questions pursuant to subpoena to the court no later than 30 days after the date of this order; and Upon receipt of the deposition answers, the clerk of the court s hall forward copies to the parties; and Plaintiffs opposition to defendants September 27, 2012 motion for summary judgment shall be filed and served not later than thirty days after service of inmate Sotos responses and defendants reply, if any, shall be filed and served not later than fourteen days thereafter.(Dillon, M)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
10
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
11
JAMES M. MILLIKEN,
12
Plaintiff,
13
No. 2:10-cv-1412-WBS-JFM (PC)
vs.
14
MR. LIGHTFIELD, et al.,
15
Defendants.
/
16
17
ORDER
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to
18
42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action is proceeding on plaintiff’s first amended complaint, filed October
19
8, 2010. Plaintiff claims that his rights under the Eighth Amendment were violated by deliberate
20
indifference to his health and safety.
21
By order filed June 18, 2012, the court directed a procedure for deposition by
22
written questions of inmate Sergio Soto. Defendants have now filed objections to the proposed
23
questions for said inmate and proposed written cross-examination questions, and plaintiff has
24
filed objections to the proposed cross-examination questions. After review of all of the relevant
25
documents, and good cause appearing, all of the proposed questions and cross-examination
26
questions will be forwarded to inmate Soto for responses. All objections to the proposed
1
1
questions and proposed cross-examination questions will be preserved and admissibility of any
2
and all responses will be subject to said objections and any others that may be raised at the time
3
any response is offered into evidence.
4
The court now orders the clerk to forward a copy of the direct examination
5
questions and the cross-examination questions to the deponent along with a subpoena issued by
6
the court and a copy of this order. The deponent shall write out the answers to the questions on
7
the forms provided, swear to their truthfulness, and return them to the court. The clerk shall then
8
forward copies of the answers to the parties. Counsel for defendants are ordered to provide such
9
assistance as is required within the prisons to effectuate this order. The deposition shall occur
10
within thirty days from the date of this order.
11
In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
12
1. The clerk of the court is ordered to forward the subpoena, a copy of this order,
13
a copy of the written deposition questions (pages 1-4 of document # 59), and a copy of the
14
written cross-examination questions (document # 61) to Sergio Soto, # J-00959, California State
15
Prison-Sacramento, P.O. Box 290002, Represa, CA 95671;
16
17
2. Mr. Soto shall return the questions pursuant to subpoena to the court no later
than thirty days after the date of this order; and
18
19
3. Upon receipt of the deposition answers, the clerk of the court shall forward
copies to the parties; and
20
4. Plaintiff’s opposition to defendants’ September 27, 2012 motion for summary
21
judgment shall be filed and served not later than thirty days after service of inmate Soto’s
22
/////
23
/////
24
/////
25
/////
26
/////
2
1
responses and defendants’ reply, if any, shall be filed and served not later than fourteen days
2
thereafter.
3
DATED: September 28, 2012.
4
5
6
7
8
12
m ill1412.415.1
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
3
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?