Toliver v. Olmsted et al

Filing 53

ORDER DENYING 46 Motion ; DENYING 47 Motion to Produce; DENYING 48 Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery. Signed by Magistrate Judge Donald G. Wilkerson on 3/15/16. (sgp)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
UNKNOWN PARTY, DARIN OLMSTEAD,)
)
and CYNTHIA JORDAN,
)
)
Defendants.
ANTHONY TOLIVER,

Case No. 3:14-cv-1064-NJR-DGW

ORDER
WILKERSON, Magistrate Judge:
Now pending before the Court are three motions filed by Plaintiff, Anthony Toliver,
related to discovery (Docs. 46, 47, and 48) on February 5 and 8, 2016.
Plaintiff seeks a copy of his deposition transcript (which was taken on November 13,
2015), he requests copies of grievances, logs, names of medical personnel, and incident reports.
Plaintiff also seeks a reopening of discovery due to institutional lock downs from October 2015 to
January 2016. Plaintiff has attached interrogatories directed to Defendants.
On January 27, 2015, a Scheduling Order was entered in this matter setting forth a
November 20, 2015 discovery deadline (Doc. 13). No extension of that deadline has been
granted. In Plaintiff’s first Motion (Doc. 46), he indicates that he has not received a copy of his
transcript for corrections and signature (See Doc. 45). It appears, however, that Plaintiff received
a copy of his transcript after this motion was filed – it is attached to Defendants’ motion for
summary Judgment filed on February 29, 2016 (Doc. 50-1, p. 11). To the extent that Plaintiff
complains that his legal mail is being interfered with, such claims are beyond the claims made in
this suit and will not be considered.

Page 1 of 2

In his “Motion for Reopening Discovery,” Plaintiff states that because of institutional
lockdowns from October 2015 to January 2016, he was not able to go to the law library in order to
serve the interrogatories and requests to produce contained in Document 47. Plaintiff offers no
reason, however, why he failed to conduct discovery from January to October 2015. Plaintiff has
failed to show what good cause and excusable neglect would warrant an extension of the discovery
deadline. See FED.R.CIV.P. 6(b)(1).
Plaintiff’s Motions are DENIED (Docs. 46, 47, and 48).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: March 15, 2016

DONALD G. WILKERSON
United States Magistrate Judge

Page 2 of 2