Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_05-cv-03759/USCOURTS-cand-4_05-cv-03759-4/pdf.json

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TODD ASHKER,

 Plaintiff,

 v.

EDWARD ALAMEIDA, et al.,

Defendants.

___________________________________/

No. C 05-03759 CW (EDL)

ORDER LIFTING STAY OF DISCOVERY

ORDERED ON MARCH 30, 2007

On November 30, 2006, Defendants filed a motion to stay discovery until the Court’s ruling

on their motion to dismiss and for summary judgment. On March 30, 2007, this Court issued an

Order Granting in Part Defendants’ Motion for Stay of Discovery, stating: “As to the limited scope

of discovery previously ordered, Defendants’ motion to stay discovery is denied. As to any further

discovery, Defendants’ motion to stay discovery is granted.” Mar. 30, 2007 Order at 3:24-25. 

On June 18, 2007, Judge Wilken granted Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File a Supplemental

Complaint, stating: “Plaintiff need not seek the permission of this Court before seeking discovery

from Defendants and Defendants shall not object to any discovery sought or refuse to provide such

discovery solely on the grounds that Plaintiff has not sought this Court’s permission to serve

discovery requests.” June 18, 2007 Order at 10:23-28. 

On September 27, 2007, Defendants filed a letter seeking clarification as to whether

discovery remained stayed pursuant to this Court’s March 30, 2007 Order. On September 28, 2007,

Judge Wilken issued an Order granting Defendants’ motion to dismiss and for summary judgment. 

Case 4:05-cv-03759-CW Document 164 Filed 10/03/07 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 obtained a stay of discovery from this Court on the ground that their dispositive

motions were pending. Because those motions have now been resolved, the basis for the stay no

longer exists. Moreover, in her Order, Judge Wilken addressed Plaintiff’s ability to seek discovery. 

Accordingly, the stay of discovery ordered by the Court on March 30, 2007 is lifted. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 3, 2007

_______________________________

ELIZABETH D. LAPORTE

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 4:05-cv-03759-CW Document 164 Filed 10/03/07 Page 2 of 2