Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-02757/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-02757-6/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL BAKER,

Plaintiff, No. 2:09-cv-2757 MCE KJN P

vs.

PEREZ, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff has requested an extension of time to respond to defendants’

interrogatories. Good cause appearing, plaintiff is granted thirty days from the date of this order

to respond to defendants’ interrogatories. 

On January 21, 2011, plaintiff filed a request to conduct additional discovery. 

Plaintiff requests that defendants be ordered to respond to his discovery requests served on

January 17, 2011. Defendants have not opposed this request. Accordingly, defendants are

ordered to respond to plaintiff’s discovery requests served on January 17, 2011.

On February 7, 2011, plaintiff filed a motion for leave to serve six additional

depositions by written questions. On January 5, 2011, the court granted plaintiff’s motion to

conduct depositions by written questions and directed the Clerk of the Court to serve plaintiff

with twenty-three subpoena forms. In the pending motion, plaintiff requests that he be sent 

Case 2:09-cv-02757-MCE-KJN Document 53 Filed 02/23/11 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

six additional subpoenas. Good cause appearing, this motion is granted.

On February 14, 2011, plaintiff filed a motion requesting instructions regarding

how to conduct depositions by written questions. The court cannot provide plaintiff with legal

advice regarding how to conduct discovery. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 31 addresses

depositions by written questions.

Both parties appear to have conducted extensive discovery. Both parties have also

had adequate time to conduct discovery. No further requests to conduct additional discovery will

be granted. No further requests for extensions of time to respond to discovery requests will be

granted.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s motion for extension of time (Dkt. No. 49) is granted; plaintiff’s

responses to defendants’ interrogatories must be served within thirty days of the date of this

order;

2. Plaintiff’s motion for leave to conduct additional discovery (No. 50) is granted;

defendants shall respond to plaintiff’s discovery requests served on January 17, 2011;

3. Plaintiff’s motion for leave to serve additional depositions by written question

(Dkt. No. 51) is granted; the Clerk of the Court is directed to send plaintiff six subpoena forms;

4. Plaintiff’s motion for instructions regarding how to conduct discovery (Dkt.

No. 52) is denied.

DATED: February 22, 2011

_____________________________________

KENDALL J. NEWMAN

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

bake2757.36

Case 2:09-cv-02757-MCE-KJN Document 53 Filed 02/23/11 Page 2 of 2