Walker v. LaValley et al

Filing 76

ORDER: On February 10, 2014, plaintiff filed a motion to compel responses to interrogatories, admissions, production of documents, genuineness of documents and seeking the imposition of sanctions. Dkt. No. 60 . On February 21, 2014, defendants file d a letter brief in response to plaintiff's motion to compel. Dkt. No. 64 . A conference was conducted onthe- record with plaintiff pro se and defendants' counsel on May 1, 2014. A second conference was conducted with plaintiff pro se and defendants' attorneys on- the-record on May 16, 2014. As directed during those conferences and for the reasons stated at those conferences, which are incorporated herein by reference, it is hereby ORDERED that: 1) Defendants shall serve su pplemental responses to plaintiff pro se's various discovery demands as directed by the Court by June 16, 2014; 2) Plaintiff pro se's request for the imposition of sanctions is DENIED. 3) Discovery in this matter is closed. Signed by Magistrate Judge Christian F. Hummel on 5/19/2014. (ptm) (Copy served on plaintiff by regular mail)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

TYRONE WALKER,
Plaintiff,
v.

No. 12-CV-807
(TJM/CFH)

THOMAS LaVALLEY, Superintendent,
Clinton Correctional Facility; S. BROWN,
Deputy Superintendent of Security, Clinton
Correctional Facility; CAPTAIN FACTEAU,
Captain and Acting Deputy Superintendent
of Security, Clinton Correctional Facility;
SERGEANT DELUTIS, Special Housing Unit,
Area Supervisor, Clinton Correctional Facility,
Defendants.

CHRISTIAN F. HUMMEL
U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE
ORDER
On February 10, 2014, plaintiff filed a motion to compel responses to interrogatories,
admissions, production of documents, genuineness of documents and seeking the
imposition of sanctions. Dkt. No. 60. On February 21, 2014, defendants filed a letter brief
in response to plaintiff’s motion to compel. Dkt. No. 64. A conference was conducted onthe-record with plaintiff pro se and defendants’ counsel on May 1, 2014. A second
conference was conducted with plaintiff pro se and defendants’ attorneys on-the-record on
May 16, 2014. As directed during those conferences and for the reasons stated at those
conferences, which are incorporated herein by reference, it is hereby ORDERED that:
1)

Defendants shall serve supplemental responses to plaintiff pro se’s various
discovery demands as directed by the Court by June 16, 2014;

2)

Plaintiff pro se’s request for the imposition of sanctions is DENIED.

3)

Discovery in this matter is closed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 19, 2014
Albany, New York

2