Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_00-cv-06331/USCOURTS-caed-1_00-cv-06331-10/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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SCOTT STEARNS,

Plaintiff,

v.

FLORES, et. al.,

Defendants.

 /

CV F 00 6331 AWI LJO P 

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO COMPEL

(Doc. 343.) 

 Scott Stearns (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in

this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

On November 10, 2005, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Compel discovery. Plaintiff does not

indicate in his Motion what discovery he seeks to compel. In any event, shortly after the filing of

this document, the Court issued a Discovery and Scheduling Order opening the discovery process

and setting forth deadlines for the filing of dispositive motions. 

The Court’s discovery and scheduling order issued November 15, 2005, stated

specifically that all discovery was to comply with all pertinent rules including Rules 5, 7, 11, 26,

and 37 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Rules 11-110, 7-130, 7-131, 7-132, 5-134, 5-

Case 1:00-cv-06331-DLB Document 352 Filed 12/15/05 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

2

135, 6-136, 43-140 and 78-230(m) of the Local Rules of Practice for the United States Court. 

Plaintiff has been informed of these requirements on numerous occasions as it appears from the

Court record that he has previously filed Motions to Compel. 

Rule 37(a)(2)(A) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that a motion to

compel contain certification that the moving party has, in good faith, conferred or attempted to

confer with the party not making the disclosure in an effort to secure the disclosure without court

intervention. The Motion before the court, however, contains no certification that Plaintiff has

complied with the meet and confer requirement imposed by the rules. 

Accordingly, as the Motion to Compel was filed before discovery was opened and

because the Motion fails to comply with the requirements of the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure, the Motion is DENIED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 14, 2005 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill 

b9ed48 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:00-cv-06331-DLB Document 352 Filed 12/15/05 Page 2 of 2