Castle v. Sepulveda

Filing 28

ORDER by Judge Lucy H. Koh denying 27 Motion to Compel (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service) (mpb, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/2/2013)

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

SY LEE CASTLE,

12
13
14
15

Plaintiff,
v.
M. SEPULVEDA,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. C 12-2193 LHK (PR)
ORDER DENYING
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO
COMPEL DISCOVERY
(Docket No. 27)

16
17

Plaintiff, a state prisoner, filed the instant pro se prisoner complaint under 42 U.S.C.

18

§ 1983. Before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion to compel discovery. The Court may grant a

19

motion to compel discovery only after Plaintiff satisfies the “meet and confer” requirements of

20

the discovery rules. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(2)(A) (providing that a motion to compel must

21

include certification that movant has in good faith conferred and attempted to confer with non-

22

disclosing party in effort to secure disclosure without court action); N.D. Cal. Civ. R. 37-1

23

(same). Because Plaintiff is detained, however, he is not required to meet and confer with

24

Defendant in person. Rather, if his discovery requests are denied, and he intends to seek a

25

motion to compel, he must send a letter to Defendant to that effect, offering Defendant one last

26

opportunity to provide him with the sought-after information. Here, Plaintiff has not filed the

27

requisite certification showing that he has met and conferred with Defendant about any non-

28

disclosure. Thus, Plaintiff’s motion to compel is DENIED without prejudice as premature.
Order Denying Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Discovery
G:\PRO-SE\SJ.LHK\CR.12\Castle193mtc.wpd

1
2

IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED:

5/1/13
LUCY H. KOH
United States District Judge

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Order Denying Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Discovery
G:\PRO-SE\SJ.LHK\CR.12\Castle193mtc.wpd

2