Doolittle v. Holmes et al

Filing 70

ORDER denying as premature 65 Pltfs Motion to Compel Discovery. Signed by Magistrate Judge Christine Noland on 4/21/2009. (JDL, )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA JOHN DOOLITTLE (#109680) VERSUS SGT. HERMAN HOLMES, ET AL. ORDER This matter comes before the Court on the plaintiff's Motion to Compel Discovery, rec.doc.no. 65. This motion is opposed. NO. 06-0986-RET-CN CIVIL ACTION

Considering that the plaintiff has not represented in his motion that he has, "in good faith conferred or attempted to confer with the person or party failing to make disclosure or discovery in an effort to obtain it without court action," as mandated by Rule 37(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, this motion shall be denied as

premature. 1

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that the plaintiff's Motion to Compel Discovery, rec.doc.no. 65, be and it is hereby DENIED AS PREMATURE. Signed in chambers in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, April 21, 2009.

MAGISTRATE JUDGE CHRISTINE NOLAND

The Court further notes, without deciding, that the defendants appear to have adequately responded to the plaintiff's discovery. Specifically, it appears that the defendants have provided to the plaintiff the requested written prison regulations and national standards governing the allowance of exercise to inmates on administrative backlog, and it appears that the provision of the plaintiff's medical records from August, 2006 to September, 2007, is a reasonable response inasmuch as the plaintiff complains of events occurring in late 2006, making his medical records for 2005 (which he requests) irrelevant to this proceeding.

1