Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-00942/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-00942-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 362
Nature of Suit: Medical Malpractice
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

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

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JAMAL AUSTIN,

Plaintiff,

v.

THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 15-cv-00942-EMC 

ORDER RE PLAINTIFF’S LETTER 

DATED MAY 24, 2016

Docket No. 58

Plaintiff has filed a letter with the Court, asking, in effect, for it to assist him in obtaining 

discovery from Defendants. At this juncture, the Court shall not grant Plaintiff any relief. 

Plaintiff has failed to establish that he served discovery requests on Defendants and that 

Defendants refused or otherwise failed to provide discovery. See, e.g., Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(b)(2)(A)

(providing that “[t]he party to whom the request [for documents] is directed must respond in 

writing within 30 days after being served”). Furthermore, even if Defendants did fail to provide 

discovery, Plaintiff has not shown that he met and conferred with Defendants in the attempt to 

resolve the discovery dispute without the need for judicial intervention. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 

37(a)(1) (providing that a party may move for an order compelling disclosure or discovery but that 

the “motion must include a certification that the movant has in good faith conferred or attempted

to confer with the person or party failing to make disclosure or discovery in an effort to obtain it 

without court”). Accordingly, the Court denies Plaintiff’s request for relief, but without prejudice.

///

///

///

///

Case 3:15-cv-00942-EMC Document 59 Filed 06/07/16 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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

The Court also advises Plaintiff to use as a reference Representing Yourself in Federal 

Court: A Handbook for Pro Se Litigants, a copy of which was previously sent to him. The 

document includes, inter alia, a discussion on discovery. 

This order disposes of Docket No. 58.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 7, 2016

______________________________________

EDWARD M. CHEN

United States District Judge

Case 3:15-cv-00942-EMC Document 59 Filed 06/07/16 Page 2 of 2