Shove v. McDonald et al

Filing 84

ORDER by Judge James Donato denying 66 Motion to Dismiss; denying 74 Motion for Leave to File; vacating 77 Motion ; vacating 78 Motion ; vacating 79 Motion ; vacating 80 Motion to Produce; dismissing 81 Motion for Protective Order; vacating 82 Motion ; vacating 83 Motion. (lrcS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/7/2017)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 THEODORE SHOVE, Plaintiff, 8 9 10 ORDER ON MOTIONS v. Re: Dkt. Nos. 66, 74, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, MCDONALD, et al., Defendants. 11 United States District Court Northern District of California Case No. 14-cv-02903-JD 83 12 13 This is a civil rights case brought pro se by a state prisoner. The Court granted defendants’ 14 motion to revoke plaintiff’s in forma pauperis (“IFP”) status. The case was dismissed and closed 15 after plaintiff failed to pay the filing fee. The Ninth Circuit reversed and remanded in light of two 16 recently decided cases that clarified what dismissals may constitute strikes. Docket No. 50. On 17 August 8, 2017, the case was reopened and defendants filed a second motion to revoke plaintiff’s 18 IFP status identifying different cases. In light of the Ninth Circuit cases cited in the remand order, 19 and the facts in this case, specifically with respect to plaintiff’s financial situation and claims, the 20 Court denies defendants’ second motion to revoke IFP, the case will continue and plaintiff will 21 continue proceeding IFP. This is for the limited purpose of this case and has no bearing on 22 plaintiff’s IFP status in any other or future case. Defendants’ motion for a protective order to stay 23 discovery is denied and discovery will continue. If plaintiff seeks to compel discovery he must 24 first seek it from defendants. If plaintiff files a motion to compel in this Court he must identify 25 what discovery he seeks, why defendants’ response was improper and why he is entitled to the 26 discovery. Plaintiff is advised to submit specific discovery requests to defendants that are relevant 27 to this action. 28 CONCLUSION 1 2 1. Defendants’ motions (Docket Nos. 66, 74, 81) are DENIED. 3 2. Plaintiff’s motions (Docket Nos. 77, 78, 79, 80, 82, 83) are VACATED. 4 3. Defendants shall file a motion for summary judgment within ninety days from 5 service or this order or indicate that no motion will be filed. All other aspects of the Order of 6 Service (Docket No. 13) remain in effect and the parties shall refer to that Order. 7 4. The Clerk shall send plaintiff a copy of the Order of Service (Docket No. 13). 8 5. It is the plaintiff’s responsibility to prosecute this case. Plaintiff must keep the Court informed of any change of address by filing a separate paper with the clerk headed “Notice 10 of Change of Address,” and must comply with the Court’s orders in a timely fashion. Failure to 11 United States District Court Northern District of California 9 do so may result in the dismissal of this action for failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of 12 Civil Procedure 41(b). 13 14 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: November 7, 2017 15 16 JAMES DONATO United States District Judge 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 4 THEODORE SHOVE, Case No. 14-cv-02903-JD Plaintiff, 5 v. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 6 7 MCDONALD, et al., Defendants. 8 9 10 I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California. United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 That on November 7, 2017, 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. 16 17 18 Theodore Shove ID: G11092 San Quentin State Prison San Quentin, CA 94974 19 20 Dated: November 7, 2017 21 22 23 Susan Y. Soong Clerk, United States District Court 24 25 26 By:________________________ LISA R. CLARK, Deputy Clerk to the Honorable JAMES DONATO 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?