Moon v. Jordan et al

Filing 86

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that on Plaintiffs Motion to Compel (ECF No. 43), Plaintiffs Second Motion to Reset/ Amend Scheduling Order (ECF No. 44), and Plaintiffs Motion to Stay Summary Judgment Proceeding (Pending Resolution of Discovery and Pending Motions) Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(f) (ECF No. 56) are DENIED. Signed by District Judge Ronnie L. White on 11/9/2017. (JMC)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
SOUTHEASTERN DIVISION

DARNELL WESLEY MOON,
Plaintiff,
v.
JOHN JORDAN, SHERIFF, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.

1:15CV167 RLW

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs Motion to Compel (ECF No. 43), Plaintiff's
Second Motion to Reset/Amend Scheduling Order (ECF No. 44), and Plaintiff's Motion to Stay
Summary Judgment Proceeding (Pending Resolution of Discovery and Pending Motions)
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(t) (ECF No. 56).
In the Motion to Compel and the Motion to Reset/Amend the Scheduling Order, Plaintiff
Darnell Wesley Moon ("Moon") requests that this Court afford him additional time to conduct
discovery, which he claims is relevant to his defenses to Defendants' Motion for Summary
Judgment. The Court notes that Moon has conducted significant and detailed discovery. Most
recently, Moon submitted discovery requests on February 21, 2017 requesting production of
documents, and Defendants responded on March 2, 2017. Defendants provided Moon with his
booking detail report, booking release report, medical history, inmate property list, property issued
log, various grievances filed by Moon and against Moon, the commissary property destruction
policy, the commissary account information, a chronological observation list for individuals in
segregation cell and various inmate request forms and grievance forms. The deadline for
conducting discovery was May 1, 2017. (ECF No. 3 7). Moon has had multiple opportunities to

request any outstanding discovery, but he has failed to do so. Likewise, the Court has given
Moon time to add additional parties, but he has not. Moon did nothing in between his request for
documents on February 21, 2017 and his Motion to Compel, which was filed on May 1, 2017.
Further, the requests in the Motion to Compel are all overbroad and not related to the issues
at hand. Defendants have already provided grievances related to Moon's claims. Grievances
related to other inmates are irrelevant.

Likewise, documents related to the creation of the

postcard-only policy are irrelevant to whether said policy violates Moon's First Amendment
rights. Finally, Moon's request for all documents related to the Jail's contract with Aramark Food
services is overbroad and unduly burdensome, particularly in that it fails to limit itself to Moon's
claim that he was denied a Halal diet. Therefore, the Court denies the Motion to Compel on the
merits.
In sum, the Court holds that Moon is seeking simply to delay the Court advancing this
litigation and ruling on Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment. The Court finds no basis for
granting Moon additional time to conduct discovery or to delay ruling on Defendants' fully briefed
Motion for Summary Judgment.
According!y,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that on Plaintiffs Motion to Compel (ECF No. 43),
Plaintiffs Second Motion to Reset/ Amend Scheduling Order (ECF No. 44), and Plaintiffs Motion
to Stay Summary Judgment Proceeding (Pending Resolution of Discovery and Pending Motions)
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(f) (ECF No. 56) are DENIED.

Dated this

f th day of November, 2017.

~
RONNIE L. WHITE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE