Cross v. Jaeger et al

Filing 176

MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS of the Honorable Magistrate Judge William G. Cobb, on 6/5/2015, denying Plaintiff's 175 Motion for Transcripts; directing Clerk to send Plaintiff a copy of the docket sheet (mailed 6/5/2015). (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KR)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA

ANTHONY CROSS,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
RON JAEGER, et al.,
)
)
Defendants
)
________________________________________)

3:13-cv-00433-MMD-WGC
MINUTES OF THE COURT
June 5, 2015

PRESENT: THE HONORABLE WILLIAM G. COBB, U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE
DEPUTY CLERK:

KATIE LYNN OGDEN REPORTER: NONE APPEARING

COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF(S): NONE APPEARING
COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT(S): NONE APPEARING
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS:
Before the court is Plaintiff’s Motion Requesting the Production of Transcripts. (Doc. # 175.)
Plaintiff seeks transcripts of two discovery status conferences, March 10, 2015 (Doc. # 116) and
May 22, 2015 (Doc. # 168).
Plaintiff states the transcripts would “assist Judge Du’s consideration of Plaintiff’s
objections” and that the transcripts would “authenticate” certain documents or “information to
support his litigation during dispositive motions and trial.” (Doc. # 175 at 1-2.) Plaintiff does not
state who should bear the costs of transcription. Since Plaintiff is proceeding in pro per (Doc. # 18),
the court assumes Plaintiff expects either the court or Defendant Jaeger should bear the expense of
preparing the transcripts.
The court notes the minutes of the two proceedings are comprehensive and detailed. These
minutes, coupled with the parties’ briefings attendant to Plaintiff’s objection, should provide District
Judge Miranda M. Du sufficient background on which to evaluate Plaintiff’s objections.
With regard to the “authentication” argument, the court fails to understand how a transcript
would authenticate discovery responses. The Defendant’s discovery responses , which accompanied
Plaintiff’s numerous motions to compel and/or memoranda filed with respect to such motions, speak
for themselves.

MINUTES OF THE COURT
3:13-cv-00433-MMD-WGC
Date: June 5, 2015
Page 2
The minutes of the May 22, 2015 proceeding directed Defendant to provide Plaintiff certain
additional responses to discovery which will provide Plaintiff more specific information about
Plaintiff’s claims. Additionally, the minutes reflect that “defendant Jaeger has admitted the
processing of the emergency grievance which is the gravamen of Plaintiff’s action against Jaeger.
(Doc. # 168 at 7, ¶ VIII.)
Therefore, the court sees no utility in having transcripts prepared as transcripts would not aid
in the authentication of discovery beyond that which is already documented in the records.
Plaintiff’s motion (Doc. # 175) is DENIED. However, the court directs the clerk to send to
Plaintiff a copy of the court’s docket sheet.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
LANCE S. WILSON, CLERK

By:

/s/
Deputy Clerk