Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-02589/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-02589-9/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

ERIC W. GREEN,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-07-2589 GEB JFM P

vs.

A. BURKER, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with a civil

rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On June 13, 2008, plaintiff filed a motion to

compel defendants to produce all documents requested in his April 24, 2008 Request for

Production of Documents. Plaintiff contends he submitted his request to defendants on April 24,

2008 but has received no response. Plaintiff also seeks $7,500.00, representing his reasonable

expenses in obtaining this order based on defendants’ refusal to produce the documents

requested.

Defendants oppose the motion because counsel did not receive a copy of

plaintiff’s April 24, 2008 request, the motion does not comply with the Federal Rules, and the

receipt of the request for production attached to the pending motion was June 10, 2008, which

/////

Case 2:07-cv-02589-JFM Document 40 Filed 07/21/08 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

 An award of expenses must not be ordered if: “(i) the movant filed the motion before 1

attempting in good faith to obtain the disclosure or discovery without court action; ii) the opposing

party's nondisclosure, response, or objection was substantially justified; or (iii) other circumstances

make an award of expenses unjust.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(5).

2

exceeds the court’s June 2, 2008 cut-off for written discovery. Defendants also point out that

plaintiff failed to comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(5) prior to seeking an award of expenses.1

Plaintiff has attached to his motion a copy of the discovery request at issue, but no

completed certificate of service attesting to service on counsel for defendants is attached. 

Defendants have presented evidence that they did not receive the discovery request at issue until

June 10, 2008. (See Declaration of Marta C. Barlow, filed June 27, 2008, at 1-2.) The court

finds that defendants have presented sufficient evidence that they did not receive plaintiff’s

discovery request until June 10, 2008. For that reason, plaintiff’s motion to compel and for

expenses will be denied. However, the August 1, 2008 deadline for completion of discovery set

in this court’s April 7, 2008 scheduling order notwithstanding, defendants will be directed to

respond within thirty days from the date of this order to the discovery request they received on

June 10, 2008.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s June 13, 2008 motion to compel discovery and for expenses is

denied; and

2. Within thirty days from the date of this order defendants shall serve responses

to the discovery request they received from plaintiff on June 10, 2008.

DATED: July 21, 2008.

/001; gree2589.dsc

Case 2:07-cv-02589-JFM Document 40 Filed 07/21/08 Page 2 of 2