Garces v. Pickett et al
Filing
79
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 6/13/19 DENYING plaintiff's 77 motion to Compel without prejudice. (Becknal, R)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
LUIS MANUEL GARCES,
12
Plaintiff,
13
14
15
v.
No. 2:17-cv-0319 JAM AC P
ORDER
J. PICKETT, et al.,
Defendants.
16
17
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
18
§ 1983, has filed a motion to compel discovery (ECF No. 77) and an opposition to defendants’
19
motion for a protective order (ECF No. 78).
20
On May 9, 2019, defendants filed a motion for protective order seeking to stay discovery
21
pending resolution of their concurrently filed motion for judgment on the pleadings. ECF No. 67.
22
The motion was granted. ECF No. 68. The deadlines for responding to any discovery requests
23
that had already been served were stayed, while all other deadlines in the April 9, 2019 discovery
24
and scheduling order were vacated. Id. If necessary, after defendants’ motion for judgment on
25
the pleadings has been resolved, the court will set deadlines for the parties to respond to any
26
discovery requests that were served prior to the stay, to serve additional discovery, and to file
27
motions to compel. Plaintiff’s instant motion to compel will therefore be denied without
28
prejudice to renewal once new discovery deadlines have been set.
1
1
With respect to plaintiff’s opposition to the motion for protective order, the motion has
2
already been granted, and nothing in the opposition warrants reconsideration of that order. To the
3
extent it appears that plaintiff is arguing that he requires discovery to respond to defendants’
4
motion for judgment on the pleadings, he has failed to establish that such a need exists. In ruling
5
on a motion for judgment on the pleadings under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c), the court
6
cannot consider matters outside the pleadings without treating the motion as one for summary
7
judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56. Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(d). Accordingly, the
8
court does not intend to consider any evidence outside of the complaint when considering
9
defendants’ motion. Plaintiff is reminded that he has until July 1, 2019, to respond to defendants’
10
motion for judgment on the pleadings and that failure to do so will result in a recommendation
11
that this action be dismissed for failure to prosecute.
12
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion to compel (ECF No. 77)
13
is denied without prejudice.
14
DATED: June 13, 2019
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
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?