Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01370/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01370-7/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOSE A. ORTIZ, 

Plaintiff,

v.

GARZA,

Defendant.

Case No. 1:15-cv-01370-DAD-JLT (PC)

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION 

FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS 

(Doc. 37)

On December 27, 2016, Plaintiff filed a motion requesting Defendant to produce 

documents under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 34. (Doc. 37.) This is a request for production 

of documents which should only have been served on Defendant and not filed with the Court. 

The Amended Discovery and Scheduling Order, which controls discovery in this action, 

specifically states “Discovery requests shall be served by the parties pursuant to Federal Rule of 

Civil Procedure 5 and Local Rule 135 and shall only be filed when required by Local Rules 

250.2, 250.3, and 250.4.” (Doc. 32, p. 1.) Plaintiff may file a motion to compel if, and only after 

complying with the directions in the Discovery and Scheduling Order, he feels Defendant has not 

produced a document/item that he has requested. However, Plaintiff’s motion fails to show that 

he has served his requests for production on Defendant and that Defendant has provided an 

insufficient response. 

This is not the first frivolous motion to compel that Plaintiff has improperly filed. (See 

Case 1:15-cv-01370-DAD-JLT Document 38 Filed 12/29/16 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

Docs. 26, 31.) Accordingly, any further motions from Plaintiff to compel discovery responses 

which do not meet the requirements of the Local Rules will be summarily stricken.

Thus, the Court ORDERS that Plaintiff’s motion to compel production of documents 

from Defendant, filed on December 27, 2016, is DENIED. The Clerk of the Court is directed to 

send copies of Local Rules 250.2, 250.3, and 250.4 to Plaintiff.

Plaintiff SHALL NOT file any further frivolous motions.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 29, 2016 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-01370-DAD-JLT Document 38 Filed 12/29/16 Page 2 of 2