Jones v. Skolnik et al

Filing 350

ORDER granting 316 motion for order; denying 317 motion to compel; denying 320 motion not to reopen discovery; denying as moot 329 motion for clarification; granting 349 motion to strike - Plaintiff' s 342 notice shall be stricken; denying as moot 335 motion to strike "new material"; granting as follows 334 motion for reasonable expenses: within 30 days defendants shall deposit $100 in plaintiff's inmate trust account; granting 347 motion to strike - Plaintiff's 343 response shall be stricken. Signed by Magistrate Judge Valerie P. Cooke on 8/25/2014. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KR)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

CHRISTOPHER A. JONES,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
HOWARD SKOLNIK, et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
____________________________________)

3:10-cv-00162-LRH-VPC

ORDER

August 25, 2014

11
12

Before the court are several motions by plaintiff and defendants Mustafaa and Berry.
Plaintiff’s motion for order (#316)1

13

I.

14

First, the court considers plaintiff’s motion for order, in which he essentially points out that now

15

that the District Court has overruled defendants’ objections (#315) to the court’s order granting

16

plaintiff’s motion for relief from order and reinstating three defendants (#225), the Attorney General

17

must indicate whether it accepts service on behalf of those defendants—Williams, Cox and Skolnik

18

(see #225).

19
20

Good cause appearing, plaintiff’s motion (#316) is GRANTED.

It is ORDERED as

follows:

21

1.

22
23
24
25
26

2.

27

Within TEN (10) days of the date of the entry of this order, the Attorney
General’s Office shall file a notice advising the court and plaintiff of: (a) the
names of which of the defendants—Brian Williams, Greg Cox, and Howard
Skolnik—for whom it accepts service; (b) the names of the defendants for
whom it does not accept service; and (c) the names of the defendants for
whom it is filing last-known-address information under seal. As to any of the
named defendants for whom the Attorney General’s Office cannot accept
service, the Office shall file, under seal, the last known address(es) of those
defendant(s) for whom it has such information.
If service cannot be accepted for any of the named defendant(s), plaintiff shall
file a motion identifying the unserved defendant(s), requesting issuance of a

28
1

Refers to the court’s docket number.

-1-

1

summons, and specifying a full name and address for the defendant(s). As to
any of the defendants for whom the Attorney General has not provided lastknown-address information, plaintiff shall provide the full name and address
for the defendant(s).

2
3
4

3.

If the Attorney General accepts service of process for any named defendant(s),
such defendant(s) shall file and serve an answer or other response to the
complaint within FOURTEEN (14) days from the date the Attorney General
files the notice of acceptance of service.

4.

Henceforth, plaintiff shall serve upon defendant(s) or, if an appearance has
been entered by counsel, upon their attorney(s), a copy of every pleading,
motion or other document submitted for consideration by the court. Plaintiff
shall include with the original paper submitted for filing a certificate stating
the date that a true and correct copy of the document was mailed to the
defendants or counsel for the defendants. If counsel has entered a notice of
appearance, the plaintiff shall direct service to the individual attorney named
in the notice of appearance, at the address stated therein. The court may
disregard any paper received by a district judge or magistrate judge which has
not been filed with the Clerk, and any paper received by a district judge,
magistrate judge, or the Clerk which fails to include a certificate showing
proper service.

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

II. Defendants’ discovery motion

17

Next, defendants filed a motion “not to reopen discovery” (#320), which plaintiff opposed

18

(#326). Notwithstanding the District Court’s order dated December5 10, 2013 (#225), or its order

19

overruling defendants’ objections (#315), in this motion, defendants largely attempt to re-litigate

20

whether defendants Williams, Cox and Skolnik should have been reinstated in this case. While the

21

District Court noted in its order that discovery on the claim had already closed, current defendants

22

present no proper or just basis to prevent plaintiff from conducting discovery with respect to these

23

three defendants. However, the court is mindful of the need to avoid further delay in the resolution

24

of this case.

25
26
27
28

Accordingly, defendants’ motion (#320) is DENIED. It is ORDERED as follows:
1. Discovery as to the defendants on behalf of whom the Attorney General accepts
service shall be completed no later than SIXTY (60) DAYS from the date such
defendants file an answer or responsive pleading to the complaint.
2. Dispositive motions shall be filed no later than THIRTY (30) DAYS from the
date of the close of discovery.

-2-

1
2
3
4
5

3. The joint pretrial order shall be filed no later than SIXTY (60) DAYS from the
date of close of discovery, or THIRTY (30) DAYS after the decision on any
pending dispositive motions.
NO further extensions of discovery or any other deadline set in this order will be granted to
any party for any reason.

6
7

III. Plaintiff’s motion to compel

8

On June 10, 2014, plaintiff filed a motion to compel defendants Mustafaa and Berry to

9

produce documents he requested in his fourth set of requests for production, RFP #s 39-43 (#317, p.

10

1). Defendant Mustafaa opposed (#323), and plaintiff replied (#328).

11

Generally, parties “may obtain discovery regarding any nonprivileged matter that is relevant
12
13

to any party’s claim or defense.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(1). Information that may not be admissible

14

at trial is nevertheless discoverable if it is “reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of

15

admissible evidence. Id. The district court has broad discretion in controlling discovery. The court

16

has reviewed the RFPs, the responses, and the parties’ arguments, and rules as set forth below.

17
18

Plaintiff’s motion to compel (#317) is DENIED. Defendant’s responses to RFP #s 40-43
Plaintiff’s motion to compel is further denied as to RFP #39, with the court’s

19

shall stand.

20

understanding that defendant Mustafaa has already provided or will provide, WITHIN TEN (10)

21

DAYS of the date of this order, the information he agrees in his opposition to provide (#323, p. 3;

22

#337, p. 2).
23
24

IV. Plaintiff’s motion for reasonable expenses

25

Next, the court considers plaintiff’s motion for reasonable expenses (#334) related to his

26

motion to compel defendant Berry to answer deposition questions (#293). On June 12, 2014, the

27

court granted plaintiff’s motion to compel and directed defendant Berry to answer a question now

28

posed as an interrogatory that, at the direction of counsel, he refused to answer during his deposition

-3-

1
2

(#318). Plaintiff now moves for an award of reasonable expenses that he incurred in the deposition,
motion to compel, and reply. Defendant Berry opposed (#341), and plaintiff replied (#345).

3

FRCP 37(a)(5)(A) provides that the court must, after the parties have an opportunity to be
4
5

heard, require the party that necessitated the motion to pay the movant’s reasonable expenses

6

incurred in making the motion, including attorney’s fees.

7

determine what might be “reasonable” costs, he notes that it cost him $367 to depose defendant

8

While plaintiff asks that the court

Berry and that he spent more than six hours drafting the motion to compel and his reply in support of

9

the motion (#334, p. 4). He attaches the invoice from Lawyer Solutions Group, LLC, which reflects
10
11

the following charges: $80 for court reporter’s attendance; $272 for transcript and copy; and $15 for

12

postage. Id. at 12.

13

Good cause appearing, plaintiff’s motion is GRANTED.

Defendant’s counsel was

14

unjustified in taking the drastic action of instructing the deponent not to answer, which has caused
15
16

all parties and the court to expend additional resources. However, while plaintiff incurred some

17

transcript costs in making this motion, the dispute centered on one deposition question; as such, he is

18

not entitled to all costs. The court has determined that $100 is a reasonable award of costs incurred

19
20

in bringing the motion to compel. Accordingly, counsel for defendant Berry has THIRTY (30)
DAYS from the date of this order to deposit $100 in plaintiff’s inmate trust two account.

21
22

V. Defendant’s motion to strike

23

Finally, defendants Berry and Mustafaa filed a motion to strike plaintiff’s improper response

24

(#347). On July 25, 2014, defendants filed a notice of compliance (#337), indicating their position

25

that they had complied with the court’s discovery order dated June 12, 2014 (see #318). As was

26

inevitable, this led to plaintiff filing a “response” in which he disputes that defendants have complied
27
28

with the discovery order at docket #318 (#343). Defendants now move to strike plaintiff’s response

-4-

1
2
3

as improper (#347). The court agrees with defendants that plaintiff’s response was improper and
that the parties must engage in the meet and confer process first to attempt to resolve any dispute
regarding the discovery responses at issue. Accordingly, plaintiff’s response (#347) is STRICKEN.

4
5
6
7
8

Moreover, defendants shall file no further self-serving notices of compliance, which only serve to
multiply proceedings in the already overwhelming and congested docket in this case.
VI. Conclusion
IT IS ORDERED as follows:

9

1.

Plaintiff’s motion for order (#316) is GRANTED as set forth in this order.

11

2.

Plaintiff’s motion to compel (#317) is DENIED as set forth in this order.

12

3.

Defendant’s motion not to reopen discovery (#320) is DENIED as set forth in this

10

13

order.

14

4.

Plaintiff’s motion for clarification (#329) is DENIED as moot.

5.

Defendants’ motion to strike plaintiff’s notice of supplemental authorities in support

15
16
17

of motion for clarification (#349) is GRANTED. Plaintiff’s notice (#342) SHALL BE

18

STRICKEN.

19

6.

Plaintiff’s motion to strike “new material” (#335) is DENIED as moot.

7.

Plaintiff’s motion for reasonable expenses (#334) is GRANTED as follows: within

20
21

THIRTY (30) DAYS of the date of this order, defendants SHALL DEPOSIT

22

$100 in plaintiff’s inmate trust two account.

23
24
25

8.

Defendants’ motion to strike (#347) is GRANTED. Plaintiff’s response (#343)
SHALL BE STRICKEN.

26

DATED: August 25, 2014.
27

______________________________________
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

28

-5-