Gibson v. Campbell et al

Filing 147

MINUTE ORDER denying without prejudice 144 Plaintiffs Motion for an Order Compelling Discovery by Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix on 11/4/2010.(erv, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 09-00983-WYD-KLM WELLMAN E. GIBSON, Plaintiff, v. ANNA MARIE CAMPBELL, C. HOLST, AIC, SHIRLEY STEINBECK, MARSHALL GRIFFITH, LT. STEINBECK, and DOCTOR ASSEN, Defendants. _____________________________________________________________________ MINUTE ORDER _____________________________________________________________________ ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE KRISTEN L. MIX This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion for an Order Compelling Discovery [Docket No. 144; Filed November 3, 2010] (the "Motion"). Plaintiff has been previously warned about his obligation to submit a certification that his pleading has been served on Defendant pursuant to D.C.COLO.LCivR 5.1G. [Docket No. 120]. The present Motion again fails to comply. It is subject to denial on this basis alone. Plaintiff has also been previously warned that any discovery motion must provide a legal basis for ordering the nonmoving party to provide the discovery at issue pursuant to D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.1C., including the relevance of the materials sought to Plaintiff's litigation [Docket No. 134]. The Motion again fails to comply. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion is DENIED without prejudice. Any future motion to compel discovery must comply with all applicable Federal and Local Rules. Despite the fact that Plaintiff is proceeding pro se, he is obligated to comply with the rules of the Court. See Green v. Dorrell, 969 F.2d 915, 917 (10th Cir. 1992). Dated: November 4, 2010