Sawyer v. Chappell et al

Filing 34

ORDER by Judge James Donato terminating 25 Motion for Extension of Time to File; granting 29 Motion ; denying 30 Motion to Produce. (lrcS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/4/2016)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

KEVIN DEROI SAWYER,
Plaintiff,

8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

Case No.15-cv-00220-JD

ORDER ON MOTIONS

v.

Re: Dkt. Nos. 25, 29, 30
CHRIS MACDONALD, et al.,
Defendants.

12

Plaintiff, a state prisoner, proceeds with a pro se civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. §

13

1983. The Court ordered service on defendants Cavagnolo, McDonald, and Tate who worked at

14

San Quentin State Prison. Cavagnolo has been served. The United States Marshal reported that

15

the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (“CDCR”) has no current

16

employment information regarding McDonald and no forwarding information. Docket No. 19.

17

Defendant Tate no longer works for CDCR and while a forwarding address was provided, the

18

United States Marshal went to the new address but learned that Tate had moved with no

19

forwarding address. Id. Plaintiff has provided a new address for defendant Tate; therefore, the

20

Court will order service.

21

Plaintiff has also filed a motion with the Court regarding discovery requests. Plaintiff is

22

informed that the Court generally is not involved in the discovery process and only becomes

23

involved when there is a dispute between the parties about discovery responses. Discovery

24

requests and responses normally are exchanged between the parties without any copy sent to the

25

court. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(d) (listing discovery requests and responses that “must not” be filed

26

with the court until they are used in the proceeding or the court orders otherwise). Only when the

27

parties have a discovery dispute that they cannot resolve among themselves should the parties

28

even consider asking the court to intervene in the discovery process. The Court does not have

enough time or resources to oversee all discovery, and therefore requires that the parties present to

2

it only their very specific disagreements. To promote the goal of addressing only very specific

3

disagreements (rather than becoming an overseer of all discovery), the court requires that the

4

parties meet and confer to try to resolve their disagreements before seeking court intervention. See

5

Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a); N.D. Cal. Local Rule 37. Where, as here, one of the parties is a prisoner, the

6

Court does not require in-person meetings and instead allows the prisoner and defense counsel to

7

meet and confer by telephone or exchange of letters. Although the format of the meet-and-confer

8

process changes, the substance of the rule remains the same: the parties must engage in a good

9

faith effort to meet and confer before seeking court intervention in any discovery dispute.

10

Counsel for defendant, the California Attorney General’s Office, may also provide

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

1

addresses for the other defendants under seal and the Court will order the United States Marshal to

12

serve the outstanding defendants while keeping the addresses confidential.
CONCLUSION

13
14

1. The clerk shall issue a summons and the United States Marshal shall serve, without

15

prepayment of fees, copies of the amended complaint with attachments, copies of this order and

16

the prior order of service (Docket No. 11) on Appeals Coordinator Ira Tate, 2852 Mankas Blvd.,

17

Fairfield, CA, 94534. Defendant Tate shall follow the instructions set forth in the order of service

18

(Docket No. 11).

19
20
21

2. Defendant Cavagnolo’s motion for an extension (Docket No. 29) is GRANTED and he
shall file a dispositive motion by October 31, 2016.
3. Plaintiff’s motion to produce documents (Docket No. 30) is DENIED and plaintiff

22

should review the information set forth above and counsel may provide addresses for the

23

remaining defendants under seal.

24
25

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: October 4, 2016

26
27
JAMES DONATO
United States District Judge

28
2

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

3
4

KEVIN DEROI SAWYER,

Case No. 15-cv-00220-JD

Plaintiff,
5
v.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

6
7

CHRIS MACDONALD, 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 October 4, 2016, 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

Kevin DeRoi Sawyer
P22673
San Quentin State Prison
San Quentin, CA 94974

19
20
21

Dated: October 4, 2016

22
23

Susan Y. Soong
Clerk, United States District Court

24
25
26
27

By:________________________
LISA R. CLARK, Deputy Clerk to the
Honorable JAMES DONATO

28
3