Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-02216/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-02216-37/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

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ERNEST LEE VADEN,

Plaintiff,

v.

DR. ROBERT L. MAYES, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:19-cv-2216 TLN CKD P

ORDER

On February 28, 2023, although discovery was closed, the court granted plaintiff leave to 

file motions to compel concerning defendants’ responses to plaintiff’s first set of requests for 

production of documents and/or defendants’ responses to plaintiff’s second set of requests for 

production of documents in accordance with the terms identified in the order. On November 3, 

2023, the court stayed the deadlines for the filing of any motion to compel so that the court could 

conduct an in camera review requested by the parties. As that review is complete, the court will 

reestablish the deadline for the filing of any motion to compel concerning the discovery responses 

identified above. The parties are referred to the court’s February 28, 2023, order as to the contents of 

the motion to compel, an opposition, and a reply. Failure to comply with that order in any material 

respect will result in sanctions and, as to plaintiff, could include dismissal of plaintiff’s claims.

/////

/////

Case 2:19-cv-02216-TLN-CKD Document 190 Filed 01/02/25 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

Plaintiff has asked that the court re-open discovery. This motion will be denied without 

prejudice to renewal after resolution of the motion to compel plaintiff has been authorized to file.

Resolution of the motion to compel, along with defendants’ adherence to their duty to supplement 

prior responses to requests for discovery under Rule 26 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, may 

obviate the need and/or justification for reopening of discovery.1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s request for leave to file a motion to compel (ECF No. 186) is granted. Plaintiff 

is granted 30 days within which to file motions to compel concerning defendants’ responses to 

plaintiff’s first set of requests for production of documents and/or defendants’ responses to plaintiff’s 

second set of requests for production of documents in accordance with the terms identified in the 

court’s February 28, 2023, order. Defendants may oppose any motion to compel within 30 days of 

service of the motion; the opposition must also be in accordance with the terms identified in the 

court’s February 28, 2023, order. Plaintiff may file a reply brief within 30 days of service of an 

opposition.

2. Plaintiff’s motion to reopen discovery (ECF No. 187) is denied without prejudice. 

3. The parties need not submit the status report referenced in the court’s October 11, 2024,

order. Accordingly, plaintiff’s December 26, 2024, request for leave to submit a late status report 

(ECF No. 189) is denied as moot. 

Dated: January 2, 2025

1

vade2216.mtc(7)

1 Plaintiff is informed that for this court to reopen discovery, plaintiff will have to show that the 

information sought could not reasonably have been obtained before the close of discovery. See

Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992) (whether to reopen 

discovery primarily turns on the diligence of the party seeking to conduct more discovery).

_____________________________________

CAROLYN K. DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:19-cv-02216-TLN-CKD Document 190 Filed 01/02/25 Page 2 of 2