Alexander v. Potts et al

Filing 33

ORDER signed by Chief Judge William C Griesbach on 12/10/18 denying 32 Motion for Extension of Time; denying 32 Motion to Compel. (cc: all counsel and via US Mail to Randy Alexander) (Griesbach, William)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN RANDY ALEXANDER, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 18-C-867 ALAN POTTS, et al., Defendant. ORDER Plaintiff Randy Alexander, who is currently incarcerated at Green Bay Correctional Institution, filed this pro se action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that his civil rights were violated. Presently before the court are Alexander’s motions for an extension of time to conduct discovery and to compel. For the following reasons, both motions will be denied. Alexander contends that he should have one year to conduct discovery, rather than the sixmonth period entered in the scheduling order, because this is a federal case. The court will deny the motion for an extension of time because Alexander provides no specific reason why six months is an insufficient time period in which to complete discovery. Should Alexander explain that he has specific discovery requirements that require an extension, the court will consider the request at that time. Alexander also filed a motion to compel, asserting that the defendants have refused to allow him to view video footage related to the incident. The court will deny the motion as premature because Alexander did not attempt to consult with the defendants to resolve the discovery dispute before seeking relief from the court. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(1); Civil L.R. 37 (E.D. Wis.). Alexander should attempt to consult with the assistant attorney general assigned to this case before filing a second motion to compel. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Alexander’s motions for an extension of time and to compel (ECF No. 32) are DENIED. Dated this 10th day of December, 2018. s/ William C. Griesbach William C. Griesbach, Chief Judge United States District Court 2

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?