Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00252/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00252-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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

DEMOND MIMMS, )

)

)

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

)

LYNN ATKINSON, et al., )

)

)

)

Defendants. )

 )

1:06cv0252 AWI DLB

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION TO COMPEL

(Document 9)

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF A THIRTY

DAY EXTENSION TO COMPLY WITH THE

COURT’S MARCH 31, 2006, ORDER

(Document 6)

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C.

§ 1983. Plaintiff filed his complaint on March 6, 2006. Plaintiff has not paid the $250.00 filing

fee or submitted an application to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. 

Therefore, on March 31, 2006, the Court ordered Plaintiff to submit an application to proceed in

forma pauperis or pay the filing fee. 

On April 28, 2006, Plaintiff filed a document entitled, “Motion for Corcoran Prison

Officials to Submit Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis.” He alleged that he submitted

two applications to the Corcoran Prison Trust Account Office and that the office had not

completed and returned the applications. On May 15, 2006, the Court denied the motion,

explaining that the Court has no authority over prison officials and therefore cannot compel the

trust account office to complete and submit Plaintiff’s application. The Court also granted

Plaintiff a thirty day extension to submit his application. 

Case 1:06-cv-00252-AWI -DLB Document 10 Filed 06/22/06 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

27

28

2

On June 14, 2006, Plaintiff submitted another motion requesting that the Court compel

the Corcoran Prison Trust Account Office to complete and return his application. Plaintiff states

that he submitted a third application to the office, and followed the Court’s prior instruction to

show the May 15, 2006, order to prison officials. He contends that the officials refused to

complete and return his application.

This time, Plaintiff cites Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(a) and contends that it

requires the Court to compel requested documents that pertain to his action. While Rule 37 does

allow parties to bring motions to compel, such motions are made within the context of the

discovery process in a civil case. Rule 37 does not afford the Court authority to compel a nonparty to submit a document that is Plaintiff’s sole responsibility to provide to the Court. 

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion is DENIED.

To allow Plaintiff every opportunity to comply with the Court’s order to submit an

application to proceed in forma pauperis, Plaintiff shall be provided with an thirty additional days

within which to comply with the Court’s order of March 31, 2006. Plaintiff shall show this order

to his correctional counselor, request further instruction, and comply with whatever instructions

are given. In the event that Plaintiff’s application is currently pending with the trust account

office, it is requested that Plaintiff’s counselor seek the status and inform Plaintiff of the status.

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s motion, filed June 14, 2006, is DENIED;

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

this order within which to comply with the Court’s Order of March 31, 2006; and

3. Plaintiff shall show a copy of this order to his correctional counselor, request

assistance with compliance, and follow whatever instructions are given.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: June 21, 2006 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

3b142a UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00252-AWI -DLB Document 10 Filed 06/22/06 Page 2 of 2