Everett v. Marks et al
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
Roger Marks, III, et. al.,
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
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.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?