Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-01694/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-01694-9/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

 Claims against several other defendants were dismissed by order of the district court

1

filed August 5, 2005. 

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JEFFREY MARSHALL,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-1694 LKK PAN P

vs.

SHERIFF GARY R. STANTON,

et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff is a former county jail inmate and former state prisoner proceeding pro se

and in forma pauperis with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The sole defendant

served with process in this action is Sheriff Gary R. Stanton. (See Order filed April 12, 2005.) 

1

On September 13, 2005, plaintiff filed a document styled “Motion Notice of

Notice of Request for Gathering Discovery,” by which he asks the court to “order and allow

plaintiff seek [sic] and gather discovery in the matter.” (Motion, filed September 13, 2005). He

alleges generally that defense counsel has “misconstrued” his last discovery request, but he has

not filed either the discovery request at issue or defendant’s response thereto. The court is

therefore unable to determine whether defendant should be required to provide a further

Case 2:04-cv-01694-LKK -EFB Document 104 Filed 08/28/06 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

 On October 14, 2005, plaintiff filed a request for production of documents served on 2

defendant on or about October 11, 2005, by which plaintiff appears to request documents similar

or identical to those sought by the September 30, 2005 motion to compel. 

2

response to plaintiff’s alleged discovery request. For this reason, plaintiff’s September 13, 2005

motion will be denied. 

 On September 30, 2005, plaintiff filed a motion to compel defendant to produce

several documents, including inmate grievances and other documents relating to provision of

medical care for the period from July 19, 2004 through the date of the motion. Defendant

opposes the motion on the ground that he has not be served with any request for production of

documents. Defendant’s opposition is well taken. Plaintiff’s motion will therefore be denied. 2

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s September 13, 2005 motion to compel is denied; and

2. Plaintiff’s September 30, 2005 motion to compel is denied. 

DATED: August 25, 2006.

mars1694.mtc

Case 2:04-cv-01694-LKK -EFB Document 104 Filed 08/28/06 Page 2 of 2