Roberts v. Cox et al

Filing 72

ORDER Granting 69 Motion to Take Deposition of Plaintiff Ken Roberts, and Granting 71 Motion to Strike 68 Motion to Compel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Cam Ferenbach on 4/2/12. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ASB)

Download PDF
1 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 4 *** 5 KEN ROBERTS, 6 7 8 9 Plaintiff, v. JAMES GREG COX, et al., Defendants. 10 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 2:09-cv-02382-PMP -VCF ORDER 11 Before the court are defendants James Greg Cox, et al’s Motion For Leave To Depose 12 Incarcerated Individual (Plaintiff, Ken Roberts) (#69) and Motion To Strike Plaintiff’s Request for 13 Admissions and First Request for Production of Documents (#71). 14 On August 31, 2010, plaintiff Ken Roberts, an inmate at Ely State Prison in Ely, Nevada, filed 15 his complaint against several defendants for alleged civil rights violations. (#8). 16 Motion To Take Deposition 17 In the present motion (#69), the defendants ask this court to permit them to take plaintiff 18 Roberts’ deposition. Defendants assert that taking plaintiff’s deposition is “the most reliable means for 19 arriving at the truth of the matters asserted in the pleading.” (#69). 20 Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(a)(2)(B), “[a] party must obtain leave of the 21 court, and the court must grant leave to the extent consistent with Rule 26(b)(2),” if the party seeks to 22 depose an individual who is confined in prison. Rule 26(b)(1) permits litigants to “obtain discovery 23 regarding any nonprivileged matter that is relevant to any party’s claim or defense.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 24 26(b)(1). Defendants wish to depose the plaintiff in this action. (#69). The court finds that plaintiff 25 Roberts’ deposition testimony is relevant to the allegations in the complaint. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(1). 26 Therefore, the defendants are granted leave of the court to take the deposition of plaintiff Roberts. 1 Motion To Strike 2 On March 22, 2012, plaintiff Roberts filed his request for admissions (#67) and his first request 3 for production of documents (#68). Defendants assert in the instant motion that plaintiff timely served 4 defendants with these documents pursuant to the court’s March 5, 2012, order. (#71). Defendants also 5 state that they “will be serving timely objections/responses [to] [p]laintiff’s’” requests. Id. Defendants 6 ask this court to strike the plaintiff’s unnecessary filings. Id. Pursuant to Local Rule 26-8, “[u]nless 7 otherwise ordered by the court, written discovery, including responses thereto, and deposition 8 transcripts, shall not be filed with the court.” Striking the filings does not relieve defendants of their 9 obligations to respond to the written discovery in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 10 and the Local Rules of this court. 11 Accordingly, and for good cause shown, 12 IT IS ORDERED that defendants James Greg Cox, et al’s Motion For Leave To Depose 13 Incarcerated Individual (Plaintiff, Ken Roberts) (#69) is GRANTED. 14 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants James Greg Cox, et al’s Motion To Strike 15 Plaintiff’s Request for Admissions and First Request for Production of Documents (#71) is GRANTED. 16 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that plaintiff’s Request for Admissions (#67) and First Request 17 for Production of Documents (#68) be STRICKEN. 18 DATED this 2nd day of April, 2012. 19 20 21 CAM FERENBACH UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 22 23 24 25 26 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?