King et al v. Boozer et al

Filing 10

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 4/6/15 ORDERING that Plaintiffs' Request for Early Discovery 6 is DENIED; and Plaintiffs' Request to file electronically 4 is GRANTED; Plaintiffs may file all documents electronically pursuant to Local Rule 133. (Mena-Sanchez, L)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

BILL KING, et al.,

12
13
14
15

No. 2:15-cv-00691-JAM-AC

Plaintiffs,
v.

ORDER

BOBBY BOOZER, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17

Pending before the court is pro se plaintiffs’ March 30, 2015, request for electronic

18

document submission, ECF No. 4, and request for issuance of subpoenas, ECF No. 6. The court

19

construes plaintiffs’ request for issuance of subpoenas as a request for early discovery.

20

A party may not seek discovery from any source before the Rule 26(f) conference unless

21

that party first obtains a stipulation or court order permitting early discovery. Fed. R. Civ. P.

22

26(d)(1). Courts in the Ninth Circuit apply the “good cause” standard in deciding whether to

23

permit early discovery. Semitol, Inc. v. Tokyo Electron America, Inc., 208 F.R.D. 273, 276

24

(N.D. Cal. 2002) (adopting the conventional standard of “good cause” in evaluating a request for

25

expedited discovery). Good cause exists “where the need for expedited discovery, in

26

consideration of the administration of justice, outweighs the prejudice to the responding party.”

27

Id. Plaintiffs’ motion for early discovery requests that the court subpoena three witnesses for

28

trial. ECF No. 6. However, no trial has been set. Plaintiffs filed their complaint on March 27,
1

1

2015, ECF No. 1, and defendants have yet to be served. Plaintiffs offer no explanation for why a

2

subpoena should issue at this early stage of the litigation. Accordingly, the court finds that

3

plaintiffs have not shown good cause why early discovery is necessary, and their request will be

4

denied.

5
6

Having reviewed plaintiffs’ request for electronic submission, the court finds plaintiffs
have shown good cause. Accordingly, the court will grant plaintiffs’ request to electronically file.

7

In accordance with the foregoing, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that:

8

1.

Plaintiffs’ request for early discovery, ECF No. 6, is DENIED; and

9

2.

Plaintiffs’ request to file electronically, ECF No. 4, is GRANTED.

10

3.

Plaintiffs may now file all documents electronically pursuant to Local Rule 133.

11

DATED: April 6, 2015

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2