Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_18-cv-02671/USCOURTS-caed-2_18-cv-02671-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOHN PENN BIVINS,

Plaintiff,

v.

MARCO RODRIGUEZ, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:18-CV-2671-JAM-DMC-P

ORDER

Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 

42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Bivens v. Six Unknown Federal Narcotics Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971).

Pending before the court is plaintiff’s motion for contempt (ECF No. 63).

Plaintiff seeks an order of contempt against defendant Sarabia “for ignoring 

several subpoenas and withholding key evidence and information in a federal lawsuit.” ECF No. 

63, pg. 1. Plaintiff provides no supporting information, argument, or documentation. 

Plaintiff’s motion will be denied. To the extent plaintiff seeks sanctions for failure 

to provide discovery, his motion is premature in that the court has not issued a scheduling order 

opening discovery. Moreover, as a motion to compel discovery and for an award of sanctions, 

plaintiff’s motion is defective in that he has not provided a copy of the discovery in dispute, any 

indication of a meet-and-confer effort, or any argument as to why discovery should be compelled 

and sanctions awarded. 

Case 2:18-cv-02671-DAD-DMC Document 68 Filed 01/08/20 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion for contempt 

(ECF No. 63) is denied. 

Dated: January 8, 2020

____________________________________

DENNIS M. COTA

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:18-cv-02671-DAD-DMC Document 68 Filed 01/08/20 Page 2 of 2