(PC) Henderson v. Rattan et al

Filing 53

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 9/25/24 DENYING 52 Motion for Sanctions. (Becknal, R.)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

DARREN HENDERSON,

12

Plaintiff,

13

v.

14

RATTAN, et al.,

15

No. 2:22-cv-1218 AC P

ORDER

Defendants.

16
17

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a motion for sanctions based on

18

defendant’s alleged failure to comply with the court’s order directing him to provide

19

supplemental responses to various requests for admission. ECF No. 52.

20

The deadline for plaintiff to file a motion for sanctions was August 23, 2024. ECF No.

21

48. Even giving plaintiff the benefit of the prison mailbox rule, his motion was filed over three

22

weeks after the deadline passed. It was not accompanied by a motion to permit untimely filing or

23

any explanation for the untimeliness. Moreover, the court has reviewed the responses plaintiff

24

alleges are deficient and finds that defendant has complied with the court’s order to provide

25

supplemental responses. Defendant’s responses are appropriate to requests for admission. With

26

respect to Requests for Admission, Set 1, Nos. 4, 11, 13-17, to which plaintiff asserts no

27

supplemental response was provided (ECF No. 52 at 3-5), defendant was not ordered to provide

28

supplemental responses to these requests (ECF No. 39 at 14).
1

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion for sanctions (ECF No.

2

52) is DENIED.

3

DATED: September 25, 2024

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
2