Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_16-cv-00517/USCOURTS-caed-2_16-cv-00517-20/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ETUATE SEKONA,

Plaintiff,

v.

F. CUSTINO, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:16-CV-0517-JAM-DMC-P

ORDER

Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 

42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the court is plaintiff’s motion to compel further discovery 

responses (ECF No. 111). 

In his motion, plaintiff seeks further responses to discovery requests apparently 

served on or about January 3, 2019. Plaintiff attaches copies of his discovery requests, but does 

not provide the court with defendants’ allegedly deficient responses thereto. As defendants note, 

the moving party bears the burden of showing actual prejudice in the context of a discovery 

motion. See Hallett v. Morgan, 296 F.3d 732, 751 (9th Cir. 2002). Additionally, under Local 

Rule 251, motions to compel must contain a statement of the “contentions of each party as to each 

contested issue. . . .” The rule further provides that “[e]ach specific interrogatory, deposition 

question, or other item objected to, or concerning which a protective order is sought, and the 

objection thereto, shall be reproduced in full.” See id. Because plaintiff has not provided the 

Case 2:16-cv-00517-DMC Document 120 Filed 05/29/19 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

court with defendants’ responses to his discovery requests, plaintiff’s motion fails to comply with 

these requirements. Plaintiff’s motion is, therefore, deficient as it fails to provide the court with 

the necessary information to evaluate the dispute and make a decision. Plaintiff’s motion is 

denied without prejudice to a renewed motion, compliant with the applicable procedural 

requirements, timely filed within 30 days of the date of this order. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: May 29, 2019

____________________________________

DENNIS M. COTA

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:16-cv-00517-DMC Document 120 Filed 05/29/19 Page 2 of 2