Williams v. Perez et al

Filing 94

ORDER ADDRESSING PENDING MOTIONS by Judge Ronald M. Whyte. Denying 63 Motion for an Order to Use DOJ to Assist Plaintiff in Investigating the Name Defendants; Denying 66 Motion to Compel Discovery; Granting 69 Motion for Extension of Time to File Motion for Summary Judgment. (jgS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/30/2014)

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

JAMES EDWARD WILLIAMS,

12
13
14

Plaintiff,
v.
R. PEREZ, et al.,

15

Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. C 12-1691 RMW(PR)
ORDER ADDRESSING
PENDING MOTIONS
(Docket Nos. 63, 66, 69)

16
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a second amended civil rights complaint
17

(“SAC”) pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Defendants have filed a motion for summary judgment.1

18
Plaintiff’s opposition is due September 8, 2014.
19
Plaintiff has filed a motion requesting the court to order the United States Department of
20
Justice, Civil Right Division, Special Litigation Section to investigate the claims that plaintiff
21
brings forth in this civil rights action. Pursuant to the Civil Right of Institutionalized Persons
22
Act (“CRIPA”), the Attorney General has the discretion to institute a civil action against a state
23
actor who has engaged in egregious or flagrant conditions that have deprived persons of their
24
constitutional rights pursuant to “a pattern or practice of resistance to the full enjoyment of such
25
rights.” 42 U.S.C. § 1997a(a). In essence, plaintiff appears to be asking the court to use the
26
27
28

1

Defendants’ motion for an extension of time to file their motion for summary judgment
is GRANTED. (Docket No. 69.) Defendants’ motion for summary judgment is deemed timely
filed.
Order Addressing Pending Motions
C:\Users\GARCIAJ\AppData\Local\Temp\notesF8C1A4\12-1691.pending motions.wpd

1

Department of Justice to assist plaintiff in investigating the named defendants in lieu of, or in

2

addition to, conducting discovery. The court generally is not involved in the discovery process

3

and only becomes involved when there is a dispute between the parties about discovery

4

responses. Only when the parties have a discovery dispute that they cannot resolve among

5

themselves should the parties even consider asking the court to intervene in the discovery

6

process. At the time plaintiff filed his motion, there was no indication that any discovery dispute

7

was ongoing, but rather, that plaintiff wished the court to assist him in conducting discovery. As

8

such, plaintiff’s motion is DENIED. (Docket No. 63.)

9

Plaintiff has also filed a “motion to compel discovery under witness testimony.”

10

Specifically, plaintiff requests that the court obtain the forwarding address of Dr. Danial, who

11

witnessed plaintiff’s argument with defendant Perez on March 29, 2011. Plaintiff also requests

12

that the court set up a video conference and obtain answers from Dr. Danial of specific questions

13

set forth by plaintiff. The court has no authority to undertake discovery for plaintiff. Plaintiff

14

could subpoena Dr. Daniel pursuant to Rule 45 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and take

15

his deposition on written questions following the procedure set forth in Federal Rule of Civil

16

Procedure 31. Plaintiff could possibly obtain Dr. Danial’s address by sending an interrogatory to

17

defendant or by asking someone at Salinas Valley State Prison where Dr. Danial was transferred.

18

Plaintiff’s “motion to compel discovery under witness testimony” is DENIED (Docket No. 66).

19

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20
21
22

DATED: _____________________

________________________________
RONALD M. WHYTE
United States District Judge

23
24
25
26
27
28
Order Addressing Pending Motions
2
C:\Users\GARCIAJ\AppData\Local\Temp\notesF8C1A4\12-1691.pending motions.wpd

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JAMES EDWARD WILLIAMS,

Case Number: CV12-01691 RMW

Plaintiff,

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

v.
R. PEREZ et al,
Defendant.

/

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 September 30, 2014, 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.

James Edward Williams V-54214
Kern Valley State Prison
D-5-113
P.O. Box 5104
Delano, CA 93216
Dated: September 30, 2014
Richard W. Wieking, Clerk
By: Jackie Lynn Garcia, Deputy Clerk