Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01022/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01022-29/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TROAS V. BARNETT,

Plaintiff,

v.

DAVID NORMAN, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:05-cv-01022-GBC (PC)

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONS

FOR SUBPOENAS

(Doc. 116)

Plaintiff Troas V. Barnett (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed the complaint

commencing this action on August 9, 2005. (Doc. 1). On July 20, 2010, the Court issued a

Discovery/Scheduling Order establishing a deadline of March 20, 2011 for completion of discovery,

including motions to compel, and a deadline of May 31, 2011 for filing pretrial dispositive motions. 

(Docs. 59, 77). On October 24, 2011, the Court granted Plaintiff’s motion to extend discovery for

the limited purpose of conducting discovery as it relates to Defendants’ personnel files. (Doc. 124). 

On July 22, 2011, Plaintiff filed a motion requesting that the Court send Plaintiff subpoena

forms so that he can serve subpoenas on the Defendants. (Doc 116). However, discovery is only

extended for limited purpose of completing discovery as it relates to Defendants’ personnel files. 

Even if said request for subpoenas were within the scope of the limited extension of discovery,

Plaintiff must first request discovery from Defendants and if Defendants fail to make a disclosure

1

Case 1:05-cv-01022-BAM Document 126 Filed 10/25/11 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

required by Rule 26(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, then Plaintiff may seek a motion to

compel. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 37(a)(1) and (a)(3)(A). In addition, Plaintiff may request issuance of

subpoenas from the Clerk of Court pursuant to Rule 45(a)(3). Plaintiff's in forma pauperis status will

not relieve him from the payment of fees or expenses associated with the subpoenas. See Tedder v.

Odel, 890 F.2d 210, 211-212 (9th Cir.1989). Plaintiff must first serve the subpoenas, and if the

subpoenaed parties do not comply, then Plaintiff may file a motion to compel those parties to comply

with the subpoenas.

Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion requesting

subpoena forms, filed on July 22, 2011, is DENIED. (Doc. 116).

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: October 25, 2011 

0jh02o UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

2

Case 1:05-cv-01022-BAM Document 126 Filed 10/25/11 Page 2 of 2