Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_10-cv-01250/USCOURTS-caed-1_10-cv-01250-8/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

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

Plaintiff Sylester Williams is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action 

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

Now pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion to compel, filed March 13, 2014. 

Plaintiff contends that defense counsel has failed to respond to Plaintiff’s interrogatories and 

“discovery documents.” Plaintiff’s motion shall be denied.

Plaintiff’s motion is deficient. As Plaintiff was advised in the Court’s First Informational 

Order issued July 14, 2010, if a “response to discovery is unsatisfactory, the party seeking discovery 

may file a motion to compel discovery, including a copy of the discovery propounded and the 

response thereto.” (ECF No. 3 at 5:2-4.) In this instance, Plaintiff has failed to attach a copy of the 

///

///

///

SYLESTER WILLIAMS,

 Plaintiff,

v.

SERGEANT R. ANDERSON, et al.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:10-cv-01250-SAB (PC)

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION 

TO COMPEL WITHOUT PREJUDICE

[ECF No. 47]

Case 1:10-cv-01250-SAB Document 48 Filed 03/18/14 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

discovery propounded on the defendants for which he claims no response has been submitted. 

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion to compel is DENIED without prejudice. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 18, 2014 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:10-cv-01250-SAB Document 48 Filed 03/18/14 Page 2 of 2