Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01088/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01088-7/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ALVARO QUEZADA,

Plaintiff,

v.

B. GRICEWICH, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:06-cv-01088-OWW-SKO PC

ORDER DENYING MOTIONS

(Docs. 40, 45, 49, 56)

and

ORDER GRANTING THIRTY (30) DAY

EXTENSION TO FILE OPPOSITION TO

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS

Plaintiff Alvaro Quezada (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Before the Court are several

motions from Plaintiff.

I. Discussion

A. Plaintiff’s Motion for an Evidentiary Hearing

On November 20, 2009, Plaintiff filed a motion requesting an evidentiary hearing. (Doc.

#40.) Plaintiff fails to set forth any grounds for an evidentiary hearing. Plaintiff claims that an

evidentiary hearing is necessary to establish the fact that prison officials are allowing constitutional

violations to occur through the inmate appeals process. Plaintiff is advised that an evidentiary

hearing is not the appropriate avenue to address Plaintiff’s concerns. If prison officials are violating

Plaintiff’s constitutional rights through the inmate appeals process, the issue must be properly

addressed in a lawsuit, not an evidentiary hearing. Plaintiff’s motion for an evidentiary hearing will

be denied.

1

Case 1:06-cv-01088-OWW -GBC Document 58 Filed 08/11/10 Page 1 of 4
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

B. Plaintiff’s Motions for Service and Pre-Discovery

On February 26, 2010, Plaintiff filed a motion requesting service of documents to effect

service of process on Defendant John Doe. (Doc. #45.) Plaintiff admits that he does not know John

Doe’s true identity and requests the Court’s assistance in identifying and locating John Doe. 

Plaintiff filed a related motion seeking “pre-discovery” to identify John Doe on May 14, 2010. (Doc.

#49.) On July 19, 2010, Plaintiff filed a motion requesting a ruling on the May 14, 2010 motion. 

(Doc. #56.)

It is Plaintiff’s burden to obtain sufficient information regarding John Doe’s identity and

current address to effect service of process. See Puett v. Blandford, 912 F.2d 270, 275 (9th Cir.

1990) (in forma pauperis litigant entitled to have process served by U.S. Marshal if litigant provides

necessaryinformation to help effectuate service). Plaintiff may be able to obtain John Doe’s identity

through discovery. Discovery has not yet begun in this case. The Court will not open discoveryuntil

Defendant’s motion to dismiss is resolved and Defendant files an answer. When discovery is

opened, Plaintiff may propound discovery requests on Defendant to obtain John Doe’s identity. If

Plaintiff is able to identify John Doe through discovery, he may amend his complaint to state claims

against the identified John Doe and attempt to have process served. The Court will not open

discovery early for the purpose of facilitating John Doe’s identification as the resolution of the

motion to dismiss in Defendant’s favor may render the issue moot. Plaintiff’s motions will be

denied.

C. Plaintiff’s Motions Requesting Injunctive Relief

On July 19, 2010, Plaintiff filed a motion requesting a ruling on his June 30, 2010 motion

for an extension of time to file an opposition to Defendant’s motion to dismiss. (Doc. #55.) 

Although Plaintiff’s motion for an extension of time was granted, Plaintiff complains that the Court

did not rule on Plaintiff’s request to order prison officials to allow Plaintiff to obtain copies of over 

100 pages of documents Plaintiff claims that he needs in order to opposed Defendants’ motion to

2

Case 1:06-cv-01088-OWW -GBC Document 58 Filed 08/11/10 Page 2 of 4
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

dismiss. Plaintiff filed a separate orderseeking injunctive relief to compel prison officials to allow 1

Plaintiff to obtain more than 100 pages in copies.

The Court will rule on Plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunctive relief at a later date.

However, the Court notes that Plaintiff does not need to file an opposition that is more than 100

pages in length to effectivelyoppose Defendants’ motion to dismiss. Plaintiff indicates that his (now

untimely) opposition contains 250 pages of exhibits. Defendants’ motion to dismiss is relatively

straightforward. The only issue raised in their motion to dismiss is whether Plaintiff exhausted his

administrative remedies prior to filing suit. Plaintiff does not need 250 pages of exhibits to

demonstrate that he exhausted his administrative remedies prior to filing suit.

The Court notes that Plaintiff has allowed the deadline for submitting his opposition to pass

without requesting a second extension of time. The Court will provide Plaintiff with an extension

of time to file an opposition to Defendants’ motion to dismiss. However, the Court will also order

that Plaintiff be prohibited from filing an opposition that is greater than 50 pages in length (including

exhibits), without first obtaining leave from the Court. Any request for leave to file an opposition

greater than 50 pages in length (including exhibits) must persuasively demonstrate the need for such

a lengthy filing by identifying what documents Plaintiff is attempting to include and explaining how

they are both relevant and necessary to oppose Defendants’ motion to dismiss. Plaintiff is advised

that any request for leave to file an opposition greater than 50 pages (including exhibits) will be

strongly disfavored. Plaintiff is also advised that filing a request for leave to file an opposition

greater than 50 pages does not obviate Plaintiff’s obligation to file his opposition on time.

If Plaintiff attempts to file an opposition that is over 50 pages in length without first obtaining

leave from the Court, it will be stricken. Given the page limit, Plaintiff’s request for preliminary

injunctive relief will be rendered moot and Plaintiff will be required to submit his opposition within

30 days of the date of service of this order.

The Court did not rule on Plaintiff’s request for an order compelling prison officials to copy Plaintiff’s

1

documents because Plaintiff’s motion was confusingly titled “Request for an Extension of Time to Serve a Response

to Defendants 12(b) Motion, Along with a [Proposed] Order.” Plaintiff’s proposed order only addressed the issue of

an extension of time. The Court assumed that the only relief requested was the relief addressed in the proposed order

provided by Plaintiff, and issued an order that was nearly identical to the proposed order.

3

Case 1:06-cv-01088-OWW -GBC Document 58 Filed 08/11/10 Page 3 of 4
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

II. Conclusion and Order

Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s motion for an evidentiary hearing, filed on November 20, 2009, is

DENIED;

2. Plaintiff’s motion requesting service of his complaint, filed on February 26, 2010 is

DENIED;

3. Plaintiff’s motion requesting “pre-discovery,” filed on May 14, 2010 is DENIED;

4. Plaintiff’s motion seeking a ruling on his May 14, 2010 is DENIED as moot;

5. Plaintiff is granted an extension of time of thirty (30) days from the date of service

of this order within which to file his opposition to Defendants’ motion to dismiss;

and

6. Plaintiff is prohibited from filing an opposition to Defendants’ motion to dismissthat

exceeds 50 pages in length (including exhibits) without first obtaining leave from the

Court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 10, 2010 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto 

ie14hj UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

4

Case 1:06-cv-01088-OWW -GBC Document 58 Filed 08/11/10 Page 4 of 4