Flowers v. Alameda County Sheriffs et al

Filing 74

ORDER by Judge Claudia Wilken DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTIONS 63 , 68 MOTIONS FOR COURT-ORDERED TELEPHONE ACCESS AND TO PROPOUND ADDITIONAL INTERROGATORIES; SETTING DISCOVERY AND BRIEFING SCHEDULES. (ndr, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/23/2011) Modified on 6/24/2011 (cp, COURT STAFF).

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

3
4
5
6
7
8

JOSEPH J. FLOWERS,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
ALAMEDA COUNTY SHERIFF GREGORY )
AHERN, et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
_______________________________ )

No. C 08-4179 CW (PR)
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S
MOTIONS FOR COURT-ORDERED
TELEPHONE ACCESS AND TO
PROPOUND ADDITIONAL
INTERROGATORIES; SETTING
DISCOVERY AND BRIEFING
SCHEDULES

9
Plaintiff Joseph J. Flowers, a state prisoner, filed this pro

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14

se civil rights action concerning events that took place when he
was a pretrial detainee at the Alameda County jail.

dated November 24, 2010, the Court ordered Plaintiff's Third
Amended Complaint (TAC) served on nine Defendants.
Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment on May 13,

15
16
17
18

2011.

21

later than sixty days after the filing of Defendants' motion.
Now pending before the Court are Plaintiff's discoveryrelated motions for Court-ordered telephone access and to propound
additional interrogatories.
For the reasons discussed below, the motions are DENIED.

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

According to the briefing schedule previously set by the

Court, Plaintiff's opposition to Defendants' motion is due no

19
20

By Order

A.

Court-Ordered Telephone Access
Plaintiff asks the Court to order prison officials at Deuel

Vocational Institute, where Plaintiff currently is incarcerated,
to provide Plaintiff with one hour per week of telephone access so
that Plaintiff may seek the services of a private investigator to
find witnesses who have personal knowledge of the events at issue
in the instant action.

1

This case has been pending for almost three years, during

2

which Plaintiff has had ample time to write letters to potential

3

private investigators and/or witnesses, and he is not precluded

4

from doing so at this juncture in the proceedings.

5

the Court finds no good cause to order prison officials to provide

6

Plaintiff with telephone access to which he is not entitled

7

otherwise.

8

B.

9

Accordingly,

Therefore, Plaintiff's request is DENIED.

Additional Interrogatories
Plaintiff has filed a motion asking the Court to allow him to

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

propound additional interrogatories on Defendants.

11

his motion, Plaintiff states the following: (1) on March 5, 2011,

12

he served Defendants with 35 interrogatories; (2) on April 21,

13

2011, Defendants served Plaintiff with their responses to the

14

interrogatories; (3) Defendants did not respond fully to the

15

interrogatories, rather, they raised nine different objections to

16

providing the information requested by Plaintiff; (4) in addition

17

to the nine objections, Defendants informed Plaintiff that, in

18

accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 33(a)(1), they

19

would answer no more than 25 interrogatories.

In support of

20

In the instant motion, Plaintiff raises the following

21

concerns: (1) the objections raised by Defendants are inadequate

22

and/or inapplicable to Plaintiff's interrogatories, and

23

(2) Plaintiff needs to propound additional interrogatories because

24

in his first set of interrogatories he erroneously used the wrong

25

date concerning one of the incidents at issue in the instant

26

action, and (3) Plaintiff needs to propound additional

27

interrogatories because he has learned new facts not previously

28

available to him that will allow him to request more specific
2

1
2

information from Defendants.
Although Plaintiff has not captioned his motion as one to

3

compel discovery, a ruling granting Plaintiff's motion would

4

require Defendants to provide Plaintiff with responses to

5

interrogatories to which Defendants have raised objections.

6

Court does not have before it any of the original interrogatories

7

or responses, however, and there is no indication from the record

8

that the parties have made any attempt to meet and confer, as is

9

required by Civil Local Rule 37-1 prior to a district court’s

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11

The

consideration of a motion to resolve a discovery dispute.
Consequently, the Court will neither grant Plaintiff's motion

12

nor require Defendants to respond thereto.

13

will be DENIED without prejudice and the parties will be required

14

to meet and confer regarding outstanding discovery matters.

15

Where, as here, one of the parties is a prisoner, the Court does

16

not require in-person meetings and instead allows the prisoner and

17

defense counsel to meet and confer by telephone or exchange of

18

letters.

19

changes, the substance of the rule remains the same: the parties

20

must engage in a good faith effort to meet and confer before

21

seeking Court intervention in any discovery dispute.

Rather, the motion

Although the format of the meet-and-confer process

22

Additionally, in order to ensure that further briefing on

23

Defendants' motion for summary judgment is not delayed unduly, the

24

Court will require the parties to comply with the discovery and

25

briefing schedules set forth below.

26

CONCLUSION

27

For the reasons stated above, the Court orders as follows:

28

1.

Plaintiff's motion for Court-ordered telephone access is

DENIED.
3

1
2

2.

interrogatories is DENIED.

3
4

Plaintiff's motion to propound additional

3.

The parties shall abide by the following discovery

schedule:

5

a.

No later than July 5, 2011, the parties shall

6

complete all discovery and shall meet and confer regarding all

7

outstanding discovery matters that the parties have been unable to

8

resolve.

9

b.

If Plaintiff intends to file a motion to compel

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

discovery with respect to any unresolved discovery matters, he

11

shall do so, and serve a copy on Defendants, no later than July

12

15, 2011.

13
14

c.

Defendants shall file a response to Plaintiff's

motion no later than July 25, 2011.

15

d.

16

the response is filed.

17
18

4.

The motion shall be deemed submitted on the date

The parties shall abide by the following briefing

schedule:

19

a.

Plaintiff shall file with the Court and serve on

20

Defendants his opposition to Defendants' motion for summary

21

judgment no later than August 15, 2011.1

22
23

b.

September 1, 2011.

24
25

Defendants shall file a reply brief no later than

c.

The motion for summary judgment shall be deemed

submitted on the date the reply is filed.

26
27
28

1

Because of the large number of claims in the instant action,
Plaintiff is advised that in order to meet the Court's deadline he
should, to the extent possible, begin preparing his opposition
even before all discovery matters have been resolved.
4

1
2

5.

No extensions of time with respect to the above

deadlines will be granted absent compelling circumstances.

3

6.

4

IT IS SO ORDERED.

This Order terminates Docket nos. 63 and 68.

5
Dated: 6/23/2011
6

CLAUDIA WILKEN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

7
8
9

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
5

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

2
3
4

JOSEPH J. FLOWERS,
Case Number: CV08-04179 CW
Plaintiff,

5
6

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
v.

7

ALAMEDA COUNTY SHERIFF et al,

8

Defendant.

/

9

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13

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 June 23, 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.

14
15

17

Joseph J. Flowers F82065
DVI Prison
P.O. Box 600
Tracy, CA 95378

18

Dated: June 23, 2011

16

19

Richard W. Wieking, Clerk
By: Nikki Riley, Deputy Clerk

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
6