Everett v. Marks et al

Filing 9

ORDER by Magistrate Judge Charles S. Miller, Jr. denying 6 Motion for Discovery. (BG) Distributed on 8/21/2017. (rh)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA
Tilmer Everett,
Plaintiff,
vs.
Roger Marks, III, et. al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

ORDER

Case No. 1:17-cr-136

On July 25, 2017, plaintiff filed a document captioned: “Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
Rule 26. Duty to Disclose; General Provisions Governing Discovery (a)(1)(A). ‘Collusion of a
cover-up Case No. 06-9417 within Case No. 06-K-1026 R.A. #1-#61.” (Doc. No. 6). Attached
to this document were 6 exhibits.
Insofar as plaintiff may be seeking to compel production of discovery, his request (Doc. No.
6) is DENIED.1 As the court has yet to conduct an initial review of plaintiff’s pleadings as
mandated by 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, all discovery shall be stayed pending further order of the court.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated this 21st day of August, 2017.
/s/ Charles S. Miller, Jr.
Charles S. Miller, Jr., Magistrate Judge
United States District Court

1

If plaintiff is simply endeavoring to supplement his Complaint with the exhibits attached to this motion, he
can take solace in the fact that they have been filed by the Clerk’s office.