Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00124/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00124-23/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARCUS R. WILLIAMS,

Plaintiff,

v.

DERRAL G. ADAMS, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:05-cv-00124-AWI-SMS PC

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK’S OFFICE TO

FILE IN MOTION FOR STATUS

CONFERENCE BUT RETURN EXHIBIT III

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR STATUS

CONFERENCE, AND DIRECTING

PLAINTIFF TO CEASE SUBMITTING

UNNECESSARY EXHIBITS

Plaintiff Marcus R. Williams (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On August 18, 2008, the Clerk’s

Office received a motion from Plaintiff accompanied by voluminous exhibits. The motion was sent

to the undersigned for a pre-filing review based on the volume of exhibits.

Plaintiff is seeking a status conference to resolve discovery disputes. Attached to the motion

is (1) a joint statement setting forth the disagreement, drafted by Plaintiff but not signed by

Defendants, (2) defense counsel’s letter to Plaintiff regarding the discovery dispute, and (3) hundreds

of pages of documentsserved on Plaintiffin response to hisrequest for the production of documents.

The Court will retain Exhibits I and II because they are relevant to Plaintiff’s request in as

much as they identify the existence of discovery disputes. However, under no circumstance is it

necessary for the Court to consider hundreds of pages of produced documents in determining

whether a hearing needs to be set. Indeed, it is unlikely the Court would have a need to review the

documents even if a motion to compel is filed. The Court’s decision would most likely be based

Case 1:05-cv-00124-AWI-SMS Document 65 Filed 08/22/08 Page 1 of 3
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

only upon a review of the motion and opposition, the discovery request propounded by Plaintiff, and

Defendants’ written response to the discovery request. 

Exhibit III shall be returned to Plaintiff. The Court is aware that Plaintiff is submitting

voluminous exhibits not out of any ill motive but in an honest effort to fully support his position.

However, it is unnecessary and it constitutes an undue burden on the Court’s resources. Plaintiff

is directed to cease including unnecessarily burdensome exhibits with his filings. The Court

has no need to see the evidence produced to Plaintiff by Defendants until it is at issue in this action

by virtue of a motion for summary judgment or trial. If Plaintiff files a motion to compel and the

Court determines that it is necessary to see a document, the Court will direct Plaintiff to provide it

at that time. Absent such direction, the Court does not want the record further burdened by excessive

and unnecessary exhibits.

With respect to Plaintiff’s request for a status conference, if there are discovery disputes that

cannot be resolved privately between Plaintiff and defense counsel, Plaintiff’s recourse is to file a

motion to compel. The Court will not schedule a hearing to resolve a dispute when that dispute has

not been properly brought before the Court. Assuming Plaintiff files a motion to compel, the Court

will schedule a hearing if it deems one necessary after reviewing the motion, opposition, and reply.

However, while such hearings are set on occasion, they are the exception rather than the rule. Local

Rule 78-230(m). In light of the Court’s decision on this matter, the Court deems it unnecessary to

consider any opposition to the request for a status conference prior to ruling. 

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Clerk’s Office shall file Plaintiff’s motion for a status conference, received

August 18, 2008, and shall retain Exhibits I and II with the motion;

2. The Clerk’s Office shall return to Plaintiff Exhibit III;

3. Plaintiff shall not submit copies of the discovery he receives (e.g., copies of the

documents produced by Defendants) unless it is at issue in a summary judgment

proceeding or trial, or the Court requests it; and

///

///

Case 1:05-cv-00124-AWI-SMS Document 65 Filed 08/22/08 Page 2 of 3
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

3

4. Plaintiff’s motion for a status conference is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 21, 2008 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00124-AWI-SMS Document 65 Filed 08/22/08 Page 3 of 3