(PC) Smith v. Municipality of Fresno County et al
Filing
133
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 1/11/2023 DENYING plaintiff's 127 motion for a change of venue, 128 motion to compel, and 132 motion for an extension of time. (Yin, K)
Case 2:21-cv-01992-KJM-AC Document 133 Filed 01/12/23 Page 1 of 3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
GARY PAUL SMITH,
12
13
14
15
No. 2:21-cv-1992 KJM AC P
Plaintiff,
v.
ORDER
MUNICIPALITY OF FRESNO COUNTY,
et al.,
Defendants.
16
17
18
Plaintiff, a former a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a request for a motion to
19
change venue, a motion to compel, and a motion for an extension of time. ECF Nos. 127, 128,
20
132, respectively. For the reasons stated below, each of these motions will be denied.
21
I.
MOTION FOR CHANGE OF VENUE
22
Plaintiff seeks a transfer of venue to Oregon, apparently on grounds that the docket has
23
been updated to change the case name from “Smith v. Municipality of Fresno County” to “Smith
24
v. Brockway.” See ECF No. 127. Defendant Municipality of Fresno County has been dismissed,
25
ECF No. 101, and the case is proceeding against defendants Brockway and Bishop only. The
26
Clerk’s redesignation of the case name on the docket has no legal effect.
27
28
Neither does the previous dismissal of several defendants’ support venue in Oregon.
Venue is proper in a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving
1
Case 2:21-cv-01992-KJM-AC Document 133 Filed 01/12/23 Page 2 of 3
1
rise to the claim occurred. 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2). Plaintiff’s motion does not identify any
2
events occurring in Oregon. Nor does it claim that the remaining defendants have ties to Oregon.
3
ECF No. 127. To the contrary, the operative Fourth Amended Complaint states that Brockway
4
and Bishop are employed at Mule Creek State Prison. See ECF No. 41 at 2. That prison is
5
located in Ione, California. Ione is in Amador County, which is within the Eastern District of
6
California. See 28 U.S.C. § 84(b). Accordingly, plaintiff’s motion for a change of venue will be
7
denied.
8
II.
9
Plaintiff seeks to compel the production of documents. ECF No. 128. Defendants oppose
MOTION TO COMPEL
10
the motion. ECF No. 129. They argue that plaintiff’s discovery requests were not served on
11
them; that in some cases, they are repetitive; and that the requests are invalid. Id. at 3-4. In
12
addition, defendants argue that the motion is untimely. Id. at 5. Plaintiff has not filed a response
13
to defendants’ opposition.
14
The discovery and scheduling order in this case specifies that the deadline to file motions
15
to compel discovery was July 8, 2022. ECF No. 88 at 6.1 Plaintiff’s motion was filed in
16
November 2022, ECF No. 128 at 4, over four months too late. The motion to compel will
17
accordingly be denied as untimely.
18
III. MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME
19
Plaintiff has also filed a motion for a sixty-day extension of time. ECF No. 132.
20
However, the motion fails to specify what deadline plaintiff seeks to extend or why an extension
21
is needed. Id. It only states that plaintiff has moved to Kern County, has just located “the library,
22
SS office etc. etc.” and “needs the time to become acclimated.” Id. The motion will be denied.
23
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
24
1. Plaintiff’s motion for a change of venue (ECF No. 127) is DENIED;
25
2. Plaintiff’s motion to compel (ECF No. 128) is DENIED; and
26
27
28
////
1
The close of discovery was subsequently extended for the limited purpose of accomplishing
plaintiff’s deposition. See ECF Nos. 100, 105.
2
Case 2:21-cv-01992-KJM-AC Document 133 Filed 01/12/23 Page 3 of 3
1
2
3. Plaintiff’s motion for an extension of time (ECF No. 132) is DENIED.
DATED: January 11, 2023
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
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?