Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05935/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05935-13/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BRUCE PATRICK HANEY, 1:04-cv-05935-AWI-SMS-PC

Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING MOTION TO 

PROCEED IN OPEN COURT

vs.

(Document #55)

R. SALDANA, et al.,

Defendants. 

 /

Plaintiff, Bruce Patrick Haney ("Plaintiff"), is a prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights

action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed the complaint commencing this action on July 6,

2004. (Doc. 1.) This action now proceeds with the Third Amended Complaint filed on February 26,

2007, on Plaintiff’s claims for deliberate indifference to serious medical needs under the Eighth

Amendment against defendants Correctional Officer (“C/O”) R. Saldana and Correctional Sergeant A.

L. Nelson. (Doc. 26.) On April 9, 2010, Plaintiff filed a motion to proceed in open court with his

motions to compel discovery responses. (Doc. 55.)

Local Rule 230

Plaintiff requests leave to proceed in open court with his motions to compel discoveryresponses,

filed on September 9, 2009. (Doc. 50.) Under Local Rule 230, "[A]ll motions, except motions to

dismiss for lack of prosecution, filed in actions wherein one party is incarcerated and proceeding in

propria persona, shall be submitted upon the record without oral argument unless otherwise ordered by

the Court." L.R. 230(l). Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se in this action, has not shown good cause

Case 1:04-cv-05935-AWI-SMS Document 56 Filed 04/21/10 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

for his motions to be heard in open court. Therefore, Plaintiff's motions to compel shall be decided on

the record without oral argument.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion to proceed in open court is

DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 21, 2010 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-05935-AWI-SMS Document 56 Filed 04/21/10 Page 2 of 2