Scott v. Antioch Police Department et al

Filing 41

ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO RESPONS. Signed by Judge Lucy H. Koh on 1/27/12. (Attachments: # 1 certificate of mailing)(mpb, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/27/2012)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11

EDJUAN C. SCOTT,

12
13

Plaintiff,
v.

14
OFFICER JOHN FORTNER, et al.,
15
Defendants.
16

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. C 09-0720 LHK (PR)
ORDER DIRECTING
PLAINTIFF TO RESPOND

17
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed an amended civil rights complaint
18
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On November 9, 2011, the Court granted Plaintiff’s request for an
19
extension of time to respond to Defendants’ discovery requests. Plaintiff’s responses were due
20
January 9, 2012. On January 20, 2012, Defendants filed a motion to compel responses to their
21
discovery requests because Plaintiff still had not yet complied.
22
Plaintiff is directed to file a response to Defendants’ motion to compel within twenty
23
days of the filing date of this order. Failure to respond may result in sanctions, up to and
24
potentially including dismissal of this action.
25
IT IS SO ORDERED.
26

DATED: 1/26/12

27

LUCY H. KOH
United States District Judge

28
Order Directing Plaintiff to Respond
P:\pro-se\sj.lhk\cr.09\Scott720misc