Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_02-cv-05018/USCOURTS-caed-1_02-cv-05018-43/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 Kavin M. Rhodes (“Plaintiff”) is a prisoner proceeding pro se in a civil rights action 

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

Defendants filed a Motion for Summary Judgment on August 5, 2013. On September 9, 2013, 

Plaintiff filed a request for an extension of time to file an opposition. The request was granted by 

separate order.

Plaintiff’s request for an extension also included a request for “a complete copy of the 

transcript” of his April 4, 2013, deposition. Plaintiff states that prior to the commencement of the 

deposition, Defendants’ counsel stated that he would receive a copy of the deposition. Plaintiff has 

not received the copy, and contends that he needs the deposition to oppose Defendants’ “gross 

misrepresentations” of his testimony in their Motion for Summary Judgment. Mot. 2.

KAVIN M. RHODES,

 Plaintiff,

v.

ROBINSON, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

1:02cv05018 LJO DLB PC

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST 

FOR COPY OF DEPOSITION TRANSCRIPT

(Document 300)

Case 1:02-cv-05018-LJO-DLB Document 302 Filed 09/17/13 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

Plaintiff is not entitled to a free copy of his deposition transcript. Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(f)(3). 

Plaintiff is entitled to review the transcript and make changes, which was explained to him at the 

beginning of the deposition, but the request for review must have been made before the completion of 

the deposition. Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(e)(1). If Plaintiff made a timely request, the Court requests that 

Defendants ensure the review to which he is entitled occurs.

Insofar as Plaintiff believes that Defendants have misrepresented his testimony, Defendants 

have attached the relevant portions of Plaintiff’s deposition to their Motion for Summary Judgment 

and Plaintiff can review the attachments. Moreover, the Court has a complete copy of Plaintiff’s 

deposition and can assess Defendants’ statements accordingly

To the extent Plaintiff is seeking a free copy of the transcript, however, his motion is HEREBY 

DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 16, 2013 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE DEAC_Si gnat ur e- END:

3b142a

Case 1:02-cv-05018-LJO-DLB Document 302 Filed 09/17/13 Page 2 of 2