Taylor v. Lessard et al

Filing 17

ORDER DENYING Plaintiff's 10 Motion to Extend Copy Work Limit; GRANTING Defendants' 14 Motion for Leave to File. Signed by Magistrate Judge Valerie P. Cooke on 03/15/2013. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KR)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
JAMES TAYLOR,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
PAUL LESSARD, et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
______________________________)
PRESENT:

3:12-CV-0334-MMD (VPC)
MINUTES OF THE COURT
March 15, 2013

THE HONORABLE VALERIE P. COOKE, U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE

DEPUTY CLERK:

LISA MANN

REPORTER: NONE APPEARING

COUNSEL FOR PETITIONER(S): NONE APPEARING
COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT(S): NONE APPEARING
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS:
Defendants’ motion for leave to file corrected limited opposition to plaintiff’s motion to
increase copywork limit (#14) is GRANTED. Defendants corrected opposition is on file as
docket #15.
Also before this court is plaintiff’s motion to extend copywork limit (#10). Defendants
filed a corrected and limited opposition to plaintiff’s motion (#15). The court notes that plaintiff
moved to extend his copywork limit before the District of Nevada instituted its new electronic
filing program at the Northern Nevada Correctional Center on March 5, 2013. Plaintiff’s need
for copies will now be substantially reduced or eliminated with the new electronic filing program
because plaintiff will be retaining his original documents submitted for filing, and a copy will be
electronically submitted to opposing counsel and the court. See Nevada Department of
Corrections AR 723.
Plaintiff discovery in inmate lawsuits most often consists of written interrogatories,
requests for document production to defendants, and requests for admission. These are written
questions sent from one side to the other in a lawsuit, attempting to get written answers to factual
questions or seeking an explanation of the other side's legal contentions. Thus, written discovery
generally does not require that exhibits be attached by an inmate. Discovery is not filed with the
court. Therefore, plaintiff only needs to produce one original document in response to the
discovery requests to be mailed to counsel for the defendants. Should plaintiff desire to keep a
copy for himself, he can recreate his own copy or make use of carbon paper. Therefore,

Plaintiff has failed to show good cause for an increase in his copywork limit and his
motion (#10) is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
LANCE S. WILSON, CLERK
By:

/s/
Deputy Clerk