Wright v. Williams

Filing 52

ORDER denying 45 Motion to Compel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Kaymani D West on 3/14/2013.(mcot, )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA

Timothy Lee Wright #331298;
Plaintiff,
v.
Officer Wellington Williams,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

C/A No. 5:12-cv-1748-TMC-KDW

ORDER

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, seeks relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
This matter is before the court on Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel filed on January 30, 2013. ECF
No. 45. Pursuant to the provisions of Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1)(B), and
Local Rule 73.02(B)(2)(d), D.S.C., this magistrate judge is authorized to review all pretrial
matters in cases filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
Plaintiff’s motion asks the court to compel Defendant to answer “all 8 interrogatories”
and “#2 document” and “#4 document” of his requests for production. ECF No. 45. Plaintiff
argues that he served his interrogatories on December 17, 2012, and his requests for production
on October 15 and December 17, 2012, and that Defendant has not responded. Id. Plaintiff also
requests $1,850 as reasonable costs related to obtaining his requested relief. Id. Defendant
opposes Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel arguing that the discovery served on December 17, 2012
was served outside the December 3, 2012 discovery deadline established by the court. ECF No.
49. Defendant further argues that he has responded to all of Plaintiff’s discovery requests that
were served prior to the discovery deadline. Id. Defendant requests that Plaintiff’s request for
costs be denied. Id. Plaintiff has not responded to Defendant’s assertion that he complied with

Plaintiff’s discovery requests that were filed before the expiration of discovery. As it appears
that Defendant has fully responded to Plaintiff’s timely served discovery requests, Plaintiff’s
Motion to Compel, ECF No. 45, is denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

March 14, 2013
Florence, South Carolina

Kaymani D. West
United States Magistrate Judge