Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_02-cv-00910/USCOURTS-caed-2_02-cv-00910-5/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ARNOLD W. LEVI, 

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-02-0910 LKK KJM P

vs.

DIRECTOR OF CORRECTIONS, et al., 

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff is a prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C.

§ 1983. Several motions are before the court.

I. Plaintiff’s April 25, 2005 Motion To Compel Discovery

In an order filed May 13, 2005, the court directed defendant Vong to address

plaintiff’s April 25, 2005 contention that Vong had a continuing duty to respond to plaintiff’s

discovery requests when he obtained particular records

On May 20, 2005, defendant Vong filed his response, noting that he had served

supplemental discovery responses and providing copies of the supplemental responses. He

argues that no further responses are necessary to plaintiff’s requests because the additional

materials defendant Vong obtained in discovery do not change his responses to questions posed

in the requests for admissions and interrogatories. 

Case 2:02-cv-00910-LKK -KJM Document 169 Filed 08/16/05 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

2

Defendant Vong’s supplemental responses, read in the context of the

representations made in his filings of May 20th, fulfill his continuing duty to supplement

discovery, even after discovery is closed. Gaytan v. Kapus, 181 F.R.D. 573, 579 (N.D. Ill. 

1998). 

Plaintiff’s motion itself was filed on April 25, 2005, beyond the extended

discovery cut-off date of March 22, 2005. It is untimely and will be denied as such.

II. Plaintiff’s and Defendants’ Respective Motions For Judicial Intervention and for Sanctions

On May 6 and June 22, 2005, plaintiff filed requests for orders directing

California State Prison-Corcoran (Corcoran) to lift restrictions on his access to the law library,

his ability to make copies, and his access to manila envelopes in which to mail the documents to

counsel for defendant Vong and counsel for the remaining defendants.

The court will direct Maria Chan, counsel for those defendants affiliated with the

Department of Corrections, to report on the extent of and the reason for the restrictions on

plaintiff’s access to the court within twenty days of the date of this order. Counsel’s response

may be by letter and will aid the court in resolving plaintiff’s motions and defendant Vong’s June

14, 2005 motion for sanctions. Within ten days of receiving counsel Chan’s letter, plaintiff may

send an informal response, also by letter. Plaintiff will not be required to file a second copy of

the letter or to serve defendants, as they will receive notice of his response through the court’s

electronic filing system. In his letter, plaintiff should address why he could not provide the

single copy of the answers to the interrogatories to defendant Vong as required by the court’s

order of May 17, 2005. 

/////

/////

/////

/////

/////

Case 2:02-cv-00910-LKK -KJM Document 169 Filed 08/16/05 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

3

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED

1. Plaintiff’s April 25, 2005 motion to compel discovery is denied as untimely;

2. Within twenty days of the date of this order, counsel Chan is requested to file a

letter concisely addressing the extent of any restrictions imposed on plaintiff’s access to the

courts; and

3. Within ten days of receiving Ms. Chan’s letter, plaintiff may file a letter

containing a concise response, in which he also concisely responds to defendants’ June 14, 2005

motion for sanctions.

DATED: August 15, 2005.

______________________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2/levi0910.san

Case 2:02-cv-00910-LKK -KJM Document 169 Filed 08/16/05 Page 3 of 3