Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-02556/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-02556-9/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

RAUL PAYAN, 

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-03-2556 GEB JFM P

vs.

THERESA SCHWARTZ, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to

42 U.S.C. § 1983. On February 17, 2006, plaintiff filed a request for an extension of ninety days

in which to file and serve an opposition to defendants’ February 1, 2006 motion for summary

judgment. That request was granted by order filed March 8, 2006. Plaintiff has now filed a

request for reconsideration by this court of its ruling on his February 17, 2006 request. Plaintiff

seeks a specific ruling on that aspect of his request that sought an order requiring defendants to

depose plaintiff’s proposed inmate witness, Escalante, and to provide plaintiff with a copy of the

transcript of said deposition, and that sought to compel defendants to provide a further response

to a request for production of documents apparently propounded by plaintiff to learn inmate

Escalante’s “true name and prison ID number” so that he might contact said inmate to be a

witness in this matter. 

Case 2:03-cv-02556-GEB -JFM Document 55 Filed 05/24/06 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

2

In accordance with the scheduling order filed June 3, 2005, discovery closed in

this action on September 23, 2005. Plaintiff did not timely file a motion to compel the discovery

he now seeks. Moreover, the discovery request to which plaintiff now seeks a further response

sought a “CDC-154 Bed Move slip with inmate Escalante’s transfer to P-3 Ad/Seg between

October 1 through 8, 2003.” (Ex. A to Plaintiff’s Rule 56(f) Request, filed February 17, 2006.) 

Defendants objected to the request on the grounds that the information sought was not relevant or

“reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence” and that “information in

the case records of inmates may not be accessed by other inmates or parolees pursuant to Title

15, California Code of Regulations, Section 3370.” (Id.) Plaintiff has made no showing

defendants’ response to the discovery request at issue was inadequate. Finally, defendants are

not required to depose plaintiff’s proposed witnesses for purposes of aiding plaintiff in the

preparation of his case-in-chief.

For all of the foregoing reasons, plaintiff’s request for an order compelling

discovery will be denied.

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s April 14, 2006 request for reconsideration is granted; and

2. Upon reconsideration, plaintiff’s request to compel defendants to depose

inmate Escalante and to provide a further response to his request for production of documents is

denied.

DATED: May 23, 2006.

12

paya2556.rec

 

Case 2:03-cv-02556-GEB -JFM Document 55 Filed 05/24/06 Page 2 of 2