Mitchell v. Sacramento City Unified School District

Filing 42

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 2/22/2012 ORDERING 36 that plaintiff's motion to compel is DENIED without prejudice due to counsel's failure to comply with Local Rule 251(c). (Reader, L)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

EKIN MITCHELL,

11
12
13

Plaintiff,

No. CIV S-11-0362 LKK DAD

v.
SACRAMENTO CITY UNIFIED
SCHOOL DISTRICT,

14

ORDER
Defendant.

15

/

16

This matter came before the court on February 10, 2012, for hearing of plaintiff’s

17

motion to compel production of documents. Aldon L. Bolanos, Esq. appeared for plaintiff Ekin

18

Mitchell. Gloria Godinez, Esq. appeared for defendant Sacramento City Unified School District.

19

Upon consideration of the parties’ arguments on file and at the hearing, and for

20

the reasons set forth in detail on the record, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion to

21

compel (Doc. No. 36) is denied without prejudice due to counsel’s failure to comply with Local

22

Rule 251(c).

23

DATED: February 22, 2012.

24
25

DAD:6
Ddad1\orders.civil\mitchell0362.oah.021012

26
1