Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-05015/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-05015-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JACK L. MORRIS,

Plaintiff,

v.

JOE McGRATH, warden; et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C 06-5015 SI (pr)

ORDER REGARDING DISCOVERY

AND RE-SETTING DISPOSITIVE

MOTION SCHEDULE 

Plaintiff sent to the court a motion for a discovery scheduling order and for a case

management conference. The motion is GRANTED in part. (Docket # 23.) The court now

orders that discovery may be taken in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. No

further court order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(a)(2) or Local Rule 16 is required

before the parties may conduct discovery. The court denies the motion insofar as it seeks a case

management conference because a case management conference is unnecessary at this point in

the action.

Plaintiff sent to the court one subpoena and also requested that the clerk issue several

subpoenas in blank. The subpoena plaintiff submitted is defective and will not be issued. The

subpoena was sent to the court on June 24, 2007 and called for a production of documents on

June 24, 2007. It should be obvious to the plaintiff that such a subpoena could never be

complied with, as it wouldn't be served until long after the date it set for production. The other

problem is that the subpoena requests information rather than documents, yet it purports to be

a records-only subpoena. Plaintiff requested the subpoenaed party to collect information and

provide it to him, i.e., the "present and last known forwarding business addresses of all

Case 3:06-cv-05015-SI Document 26 Filed 07/30/07 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

defendants in this action." Plaintiff either needs to subpoena existing documents in a recordsonly subpoena, or subpoena a live person to answer questions in a deposition (for which he must

pay the costs and witness fees). Plaintiff also has requested that several subpoenas be issued in

blank. The court directs the clerk to mail to plaintiff seven blank subpoenas. Plaintiff should

fill them out and return them to the clerk to have them issued. The court notes that thirteen of

the defendants have now appeared in this action. As to those defendants, plaintiff no longer

needs to try to learn their addresses for purposes of service of process. 

In light of the fact that all the defendants have not yet been served, the court will re-set

the briefing schedule to give an opportunity for all the defendants to be served with process. The

briefing schedule set in the June 20, 2007 Order Extending Deadlines is now vacated and reset

as follows for dispositive motions from all defendants:

1. Defendants must file and serve their dispositive motion no later than November 2,

2007.

 2. Plaintiff must file and serve on defense counsel his opposition to the dispositive

motion no later than December 7, 2007. 

3. Defendants must file and serve their reply brief, if any, no later than December 21,

2007.

 IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 7/30/07 ________________ _______________________

 SUSAN ILLSTON

United States District Judge

Case 3:06-cv-05015-SI Document 26 Filed 07/30/07 Page 2 of 2