Draper v. Garcia

Filing 30

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 4/10/17 denying 18 Motion to compel and granting 28 Motion to strike sur-replies. The sur-replies filed by plaintiff on 3/20/17 and 3/31/17 are stricken. (Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

JOHN CLINT DRAPER,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

No. 2:16-cv-1917 GEB CKD P

v.

ORDER

A. GARCIA,

15

Defendant.

16
Plaintiff is a California prisoner proceeding pro se. On January 18, 2017, plaintiff filed

17
18

what appears to be a motion to compel defendant to provide plaintiff with a copy of some of

19

plaintiff’s medical records, some of his prison records, and defendant’s “disciplinary file.”

20

As for plaintiff’s medical and other prison records, plaintiff fails to point to facts

21

suggesting defendant has access to such records and that plaintiff cannot obtain those documents

22

on his own from his prison. If plaintiff has been denied access to those documents by his prison,

23

he should request that the court issue a subpoena for such records, but only to the extent they are

24

relevant to this case. As for defendant’s “disciplinary file,” plaintiff does not provide a copy of a

25

discovery request in which he sought defendant’s disciplinary file and defendant’s response.

26

For these reasons, plaintiff’s motion will be denied. The court notes that discovery is

27

currently stayed pending resolution of defendant’s motion for summary judgment. If the court

28

/////
1

1

imposes a new deadline for motions to compel, plaintiff will have the opportunity to correct the

2

defects in his motion to compel with respect to defendant’s “disciplinary file” and resubmit it.

3

Also, defendant has filed a motion asking that the court strike two sur-replies filed by

4

plaintiff concerning defendant’s motion for summary judgment. Since the court does not

5

generally permit sur replies, Local Rule 230(l), and since plaintiff did not obtain leave to file a

6

sur-reply, defendant’s motion to strike will be granted.

7

Accordingly. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

8

1. Plaintiff’s January 18, 2017 motion to compel is denied; and

9

2. Defendant’s April 4, 2017 motion to strike sur replies is granted. The sur replies filed

10

by plaintiff on March 20, 2017 and March 31, 2017 are stricken.

11

Dated: April 10, 2017

_____________________________________
CAROLYN K. DELANEY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

12
13
14
15
16
17

1
drap1917.mtc

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2