Carrillo v. Gillespie et al

Filing 105

ORDER Denying 80 Motion to Compel Discovery. Signed by Magistrate Judge Cam Ferenbach on 9/30/2013. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLR)

1
2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

3

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

4

***

5
6

GILBERTO CARRILLO,

7

Plaintiff,

8

vs.

9

2:12-cv-02165-JCM-VCF

DOUGLAS GILLESPIE, et al.,

ORDER

Defendants.

10
11
12

Before the Court is plaintiff’s Motion For, And To Compell [sic] Discovery (#80). Defendant

13

Gillespie filed a Response (#88). Other defendants filed a Joinder in defendant Gillespie’s Response

14

(#89).

15

As defendant Gillespie correctly points out, plaintiff’s motion does not list the discovery at issue,

16

when it was requested or plaintiff’s attempts to obtain it before filing this motion. Plaintiff did not file a

17

reply to this response or the joinder, and the time to reply has expired.

18

The motion does not comply with LR 26-7(a) and also does not comply with LR 26-7(b).

19

Accordingly, plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Discovery (#80) is DENIED.

20

DATED this 30th day of September, 2013.

21
22
23
24
25

_________________________
CAM FERENBACH
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE