Geier v. Wong et al

Filing 49

ORDER (SI, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/12/2011)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

CHRISTOPHER A. GEIER,

9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

No. C 10-1965 SI (pr)

Plaintiff,

ORDER

v.

11

Dr. STREUKER, D.D.S.,

12

Defendant.
/

13
14

Discovery was stayed in this action on September 15, 2011. Thereafter, plaintiff

15

requested a modification of the stay to permit his interrogatories to defendant. The requests are

16

DENIED. (Docket # 47 and # 48 at exhibit 1.) Plaintiff wanted an exception to the stay because

17

he thought he would otherwise be penalized as defendant had received his interrogatories in time

18

to respond to them before the stay was imposed. Plaintiff is wrong on the timing: because he

19

sent his interrogatories by mail on September 21, 2011, the response was not due before the stay

20

was imposed. Further, the stay has nothing to do with the timing of discovery requests and

21

everything to do with the need to "protect[] the substance of the qualified immunity defense."

22

See Crawford-El v. Britton, 523 U.S. 574, 597 (1998). The stay of discovery remains in place.

23

In light of the stay of discovery, plaintiff's "request for subpoena by affidavit" and

24

"request to submit additional evidence in support of request for discovery order" are DENIED.

25

(Docket # 42, # 43.)

26
27
28

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: October 12, 2011

_______________________
SUSAN ILLSTON
United States District Judge