Stein v. Woods et al

Filing 15

ORDER denying Motion fro Protective Order; Setting Discovery Limits. Signed by Judge Jeffrey S. White on 7/15/11. (jjoS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/15/2011)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10
11
12
13
14
15

DALE STEIN,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
)
v.
)
G. WOODS; DR. ARTHUR F. MAJOR; )
DR. R. NORTON; STANLAKE K. YE; )
)
G. ELLIS; N. WARREN,
)
)
Defendants.
_________________________________ )

No. C 11-1243 JSW (PR)
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
PROTECTIVE ORDER; SETTING
DISCOVERY LIMITS

16
17

Plaintiff, a California prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this rights action pursuant

18

to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against various prison officials for inadequate dental care. On May

19

3, 2011, Defendants were ordered to file a motion for summary judgment or other

20

dispositive motion within ninety days. In the meantime, they have filed a motion for a

21

protective order staying all discovery. Defendants indicate that Plaintiff has propounded

22

six sets of interrogatories for a total of 117 discovery requests. They claim that they

23

intend to assert a defense of qualified immunity in their motion for summary judgment

24

and therefore should not have to face the burden of responding to the voluminous

25

discovery requests.

26

As Plaintiff may need to propound some discovery in order to oppose a motion

27

based on qualified immunity, a complete stay of all discovery is not in order, but nor

28

does Plaintiff need to propound nearly they amount of discovery requests described by

1

Defendants. Accordingly, the Court orders as follows:

2
3

1. Plaintiff may propound no more than 15 interrogatories, no more than 10
requests for admissions, and no more than five discovery requests.
2. Defendants are not required to respond to the discovery already propounded.

4
5

Plaintiff must resubmit his discovery requests in compliance with the limits set forth

6

above.

7

3. Defendants’ motion for a protective order (docket number 10) is DENIED.

8

IT IS SO ORDERED.

9

DATED: July 15, 2011

10
11

JEFFREY S. WHITE
United States District Judge

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

FOR THE

3

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

4
5
DALE RICHARD STEIN,

Case Number: CV11-01243 JSW

6
Plaintiff,

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

7
v.

8
G WOODS et al,

9
Defendant.

10
11
12
13
14

/

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District
Court, Northern District of California.
That on July 15, 2011, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing said
copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by depositing
said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery
receptacle located in the Clerk's office.

15
16
17
18
19

Dale R. Stein
S.V.S.P.
P.O. Box 1050
J82424
Soledad, CA 93960

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Dated: July 15, 2011
Richard W. Wieking, Clerk
By: Jennifer Ottolini, Deputy Clerk