Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_10-cv-02069/USCOURTS-caed-2_10-cv-02069-6/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

SACRAMENTO DIVISION

LEON MORRIS,

Plaintiff,

v.

T. VIRGA, et al. ,

Defendants.

2:10-cv-02069 JAM DAD

ORDER

Defendants have filed a motion to stay discovery in light of their pending motion for 

summary judgment based upon plaintiff’s alleged failure to exhaust his administrative remedies 

prior to filing suit as required. Defendants’ motion is potentially dispositive of this entire case, 

and plaintiff has already opposed the motion for summary judgment indicating that discovery is 

not required on the issue of exhaustion. Under these circumstances, the court will grant 

defendants’ motion. See Albino v. Baca, 747 F.3d 1162, 1171 (9th Cir. 2014) (court may use its 

discretion to limit discovery “leaving until later – if it becomes necessary – discovery directed to 

the merits of the suit”). 

/////

/////

Case 2:10-cv-02069-TLN-DAD Document 51 Filed 10/02/14 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

Accordingly, good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 

1. Defendants’ motion for a protective order (Doc. No. 49) is granted; and

2. Discovery is stayed in this action. In the event that the court denies defendants’ pending 

motion for summary judgment, the court will issue a discovery and scheduling order for this case.

Dated: October 1, 2014

DAD:9

morr2069.stydisc

Case 2:10-cv-02069-TLN-DAD Document 51 Filed 10/02/14 Page 2 of 2