Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-01773/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-01773-21/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

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

THOMAS GOOLSBY,

Plaintiff,

vs.

GENTRY, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

1:11cv01773 LJO DLB PC

ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S 

MOTION FOR ORDER ALLOWING PBSP 

TO MAKE COPIES OF MOTION

(Document 84)

ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANTS TO 

FILE DISCOVERY REQUESTS WITH 

THEIR OPPOSITION

Plaintiff Thomas Goolsby (“Plaintiff”) is a prisoner in the custody of the California 

Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (“CDCR”). Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in 

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

on October 25, 2011. 

In April 2014, the Court permitted Plaintiff to serve discovery related to his retaliation 

claim. A general Discovery and Scheduling Order has not yet issued.

On September 24, 2014, Plaintiff filed a motion requesting an order allowing Pelican Bay 

State Prison law library staff to copy his motion to compel. Plaintiff states that pursuant to the 

Court’s requirements related to the contents of a motion to compel, his motion is well over 100 

pages. The law library, however, will only copy up to 100 pages.

Case 1:11-cv-01773-LJO-DLB Document 86 Filed 09/29/14 Page 1 of 2
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

The Court does not have jurisdiction to order prison officials to take any action, including 

copying Plaintiff’s legal documents. 

However, to assist Plaintiff in filing his motion to compel, the Court will relieve him of 

the obligation to copy the discovery requests and responses. Plaintiff therefore need only submit 

his argument as to why he believes each response is deficient. 

As the Court will need copies of the requests and responses to rule on the motion to 

compel, the Court ORDERS Defendants to provide the requests and responses at issue when they 

oppose Plaintiff’s motion to compel.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 29, 2014 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

 

Case 1:11-cv-01773-LJO-DLB Document 86 Filed 09/29/14 Page 2 of 2