Taggart v. The City and County of San Francisco et al
Filing
29
ORDER DENYING 16 Plaintiff's Motion for Discovery; GRANTING 17 Plaintiff's Motion for Blank Subpoenas; Directing Defendants to File Dispositive Motion. Dispositive Motion due by 5/27/2014. Signed by Judge Thelton E. Henderson on 05/12/2014. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(tmi, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/13/2014)
1
2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
3
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
4
No. C-13-03439 TEH (PR)
ANTHONY TAGGART,
5
Plaintiff,
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION FOR DISCOVERY; GRANTING
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR BLANK
SUBPOENAS; DIRECTING DEFENDANTS
TO FILE DISPOSITIVE MOTION
6
v.
7
8
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO,
et al.,
9
Dkt. Nos. 16, 17
Defendants.
/
10
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California
11
Plaintiff Anthony Taggart, an inmate at the San Francisco
12
13
County Jail, filed a pro se civil rights action under 42 U.S.C.
14
§ 1983.
15
Amended Complaint and found that it stated an Eighth Amendment claim
16
for deliberate indifference to medical needs.
17
service on the San Francisco Sheriff’s Department and Dr. Goldstein,
18
Chief Medical Doctor of the San Francisco County Jail.
19
dispositive motion was due on or before February 7, 2014.
20
before the Court are: (1) Plaintiff’s motion for discovery, and
21
(2) Plaintiff’s motion for blank subpoenas.
On October 4, 2013, the Court screened plaintiff’s First
The Court ordered
Defendants’
Now
I
22
Plaintiff’s motion for discovery is DENIED.
23
The Court
24
generally is not involved in the discovery process and only becomes
25
involved when there is a dispute between the parties about discovery
26
responses.
27
between the parties without any copy being sent to the Court.
28
Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(d)(1) (listing discovery requests and responses
Discovery requests and responses normally are exchanged
See
1
that “must not” be filed with the Court until they are used in the
2
proceeding or the Court orders otherwise).
3
Plaintiff’s request for subpoenas duces tecum is GRANTED.
4
The Clerk is DIRECTED to send five blank subpoenas to Plaintiff for
5
him to complete and return to the Court for issuance by the Clerk
6
and thereafter to be returned to Plaintiff for service.
7
II
8
9
The deadline for Defendants to file their dispositive
motion has now passed.
Although they filed an answer to the First
10
Amended Complaint, they never filed a dispositive motion as directed
11
by the Court in its October 4, 2013 service order.
12
dispositive motion is overdue.
13
weeks from the date of this order, Defendants shall file their
14
dispositive motion.
15
motion shall be filed with the Court and served upon Defendants no
16
later than thirty-five (35) days after Defendants serve Plaintiff
17
with the motion.
18
fourteen (14) days of the date on which Plaintiff serves them with
19
the opposition.
20
Therefore, the
Accordingly, within two
Plaintiff’s opposition to the dispositive
Defendants shall file a reply brief within
This Order terminates docket numbers 16 and 17.
21
IT IS SO ORDERED.
22
23
24
DATED
05/12/2014
THELTON E. HENDERSON
United States District Judge
25
26
27
28
G:\PRO-SE\TEH\CR.13\Taggart v. CCSF 13-3439 misc-mots.wpd
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?