Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_13-cv-00248/USCOURTS-casd-3_13-cv-00248-9/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983cv Civil Rights Act - Civil Action for Deprivation of Rights

---

1

MINUTE ORDER OF THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case Name: Kenney v. San Diego, City 

of et al

Case No.: 13-cv-00248-WQH-JLB

Hon. Jill L. Burkhardt Ct. Deputy Roi-Ann Bressi Rptr. Tape: JLB16-2:02-2:43

For the reasons stated on the record at the Oral Argument Hearing held on 

September 8, 2016 (ECF No. 438), the Court ruled on Plaintiff’s ex parte motions 

to request a discovery schedule (ECF No. 401) and to compel discovery responses 

(ECF Nos. 400, 402, 410–21) as follows:

ECF 

No.

Motion Title Court’s Ruling

400 Plaintiff’s Ex Parte Motion to Compel 

Discovery Pursuant to Court Order ECF 

385 “Substitutions”

Granted. Defendants have until 

October 10, 2016, to make their 

Rule 26 disclosures.

401 Plaintiff’s Request, Pursuant to Local 

Rule 16.1, For the Judicial Officer 

Assigned to Supervise Discovery to 

Provide a Discovery Schedule and/or 

Hold a Discovery Conference

Granted in that the Court held the 

requested Discovery Conference on 

September 8, 2016, and provided 

the following discovery schedule:

1) Responses to Plaintiff’s 

discovery propounded on 

June 27, 2016 are due

October 10, 2016.

2) Defendants may propound

contention interrogatories 

and requests for production 

of documents as to the eight

defendants recently 

substituted in as Doe 

defendants on the following 

schedule:

a. By September 22, as 

to the five who have 

already been served; 

and

Case 3:13-cv-00248-WQH-AGS Document 441 Filed 09/19/16 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 6
2

ECF 

No.

Motion Title Court’s Ruling

b. Seven days from the 

date of service as to 

the three not yet 

served (Steven Eraca, 

David Mitchell, and 

Craig Shumate).

Further, the parties have until 

September 15, 2016, to file a joint 

supplemental document setting 

forth a single proposal (if the 

parties are in agreement) or 

multiple proposals as to any 

additional dates in the schedule that 

the parties believe there is good 

cause to adjust.

402 Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Responses 

to Special Interrogatories, Set 1 to Kevin 

Armentano

Denied without prejudice. At the 

time this discovery was 

propounded, discovery had closed 

and Plaintiff had neither sought nor 

received leave of Court to reopen 

discovery. Now that Plaintiff has 

obtained leave to propound this 

discovery, defendant has until 

October 10, 2016, to respond.

407 Plaintiff Requests This Court Resend 

Court Orders ECF 385 and 386 and All 

Other Orders The Court Made 

Concerning Its Various Post-MSJ 

Rulings

Denied.

Case 3:13-cv-00248-WQH-AGS Document 441 Filed 09/19/16 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 6
3

ECF 

No.

Motion Title Court’s Ruling

410 Plaintiff’s Ex Parte Motion to Compel 

Extremely Belated Discovery Responses 

to Special Interrogatories, Set 1, from 

Defendant Armentano

Duplicative of ECF No. 402.

(Denied without prejudice. At the 

time this discovery was 

propounded, discovery had closed 

and Plaintiff had neither sought nor 

received leave of Court to reopen 

discovery. Now that Plaintiff has 

obtained leave to propound this 

discovery, defendant has until 

October 10, 2016, to respond.)

411 Plaintiff’s Ex Parte Motion to Compel 

Extremely Belated Discovery Responses 

to Special Interrogatories, Set 1, from 

Defendant Eraca

Denied without prejudice. At the 

time this discovery was 

propounded, discovery had closed 

and Plaintiff had neither sought nor 

received leave of Court to reopen 

discovery. Now that Plaintiff has 

obtained leave to propound this 

discovery, defendant has until 

October 10, 2016, to respond.

412 Plaintiff’s Ex Parte Motion to Compel 

Extremely Belated Discovery Responses 

to Special Interrogatories, Set 1, from 

Defendant Koerber

Denied without prejudice. At the 

time this discovery was 

propounded, discovery had closed 

and Plaintiff had neither sought nor 

received leave of Court to reopen 

discovery. Now that Plaintiff has 

obtained leave to propound this 

discovery, defendant has until 

October 10, 2016, to respond.

413 Plaintiff’s Ex Parte Motion to Compel 

Extremely Belated Discovery Responses 

to Special Interrogatories, Set 1, from 

Defendant Milano

Denied without prejudice. At the 

time this discovery was 

propounded, discovery had closed 

and Plaintiff had neither sought nor 

received leave of Court to reopen 

discovery. Now that Plaintiff has 

obtained leave to propound this 

discovery, defendant has until 

October 10, 2016, to respond.

Case 3:13-cv-00248-WQH-AGS Document 441 Filed 09/19/16 PageID.<pageID> Page 3 of 6
4

ECF 

No.

Motion Title Court’s Ruling

414 Plaintiff’s Ex Parte Motion to Compel 

Extremely Belated Discovery Responses 

to Special Interrogatories, Set 1, from 

Defendant Mitchell

Denied without prejudice. At the 

time this discovery was 

propounded, discovery had closed 

and Plaintiff had neither sought nor 

received leave of Court to reopen 

discovery. Now that Plaintiff has 

obtained leave to propound this 

discovery, defendant has until 

October 10, 2016, to respond.

415 Plaintiff’s Ex Parte Motion to Compel 

Extremely Belated Discovery Responses 

to Special Interrogatories, Set 1, from 

Defendant Shumate

Denied without prejudice. At the 

time this discovery was 

propounded, discovery had closed 

and Plaintiff had neither sought nor 

received leave of Court to reopen 

discovery. Now that Plaintiff has 

obtained leave to propound this 

discovery, defendant has until 

October 10, 2016 to respond.

416 Plaintiff’s Ex Parte Motion to Compel 

Extremely Belated Discovery Responses 

to Special Interrogatories, Set 1, from 

Defendant Sainte-Agathe

Denied without prejudice. At the 

time this discovery was 

propounded, discovery had closed 

and Plaintiff had neither sought nor 

received leave of Court to reopen 

discovery. Now that Plaintiff has 

obtained leave to propound this 

discovery, defendant has until 

October 10, 2016, to respond.

417 Plaintiff’s Ex Parte Motion to Compel 

Extremely Belated Discovery Responses 

to Special Interrogatories, Set 1, from 

Defendant Valdez

Denied without prejudice. At the 

time this discovery was 

propounded, discovery had closed 

and Plaintiff had neither sought nor 

received leave of Court to reopen 

discovery. Now that Plaintiff has 

obtained leave to propound this 

discovery, defendant has until 

October 10, 2016, to respond.

Case 3:13-cv-00248-WQH-AGS Document 441 Filed 09/19/16 PageID.<pageID> Page 4 of 6
5

ECF 

No.

Motion Title Court’s Ruling

418 Plaintiff’s Ex Parte Motion to Compel 

Responses to RFPs, Set 1, from 

Defendant Armentano

Denied without prejudice. At the 

time this discovery was 

propounded, discovery had closed 

and Plaintiff had neither sought nor 

received leave of Court to reopen 

discovery. Now that Plaintiff has 

obtained leave to propound this 

discovery, defendant has until 

October 10, 2016, to respond.

419 Plaintiff’s Ex Parte Motion to Compel 

Responses to RFPs, Set 1, from 

Defendant Koerber

Denied without prejudice. At the 

time this discovery was 

propounded, discovery had closed 

and Plaintiff had neither sought nor 

received leave of Court to reopen 

discovery. Now that Plaintiff has 

obtained leave to propound this 

discovery, defendant has until 

October 10, 2016, to respond.

420 Plaintiff’s Ex Parte Motion to Compel 

Responses to RFPs, Set 1, from 

Defendant Mitchell

Denied without prejudice. At the 

time this discovery was 

propounded, discovery had closed 

and Plaintiff had neither sought nor 

received leave of Court to reopen 

discovery. Now that Plaintiff has 

obtained leave to propound this 

discovery, defendant has until 

October 10, 2016, to respond.

421 Plaintiff’s Ex Parte Motion to Compel 

Responses to RFPs, Set 1, from 

Defendant Valdez

Denied without prejudice. At the 

time this discovery was 

propounded, discovery had closed 

and Plaintiff had neither sought nor 

received leave of Court to reopen 

discovery. Now that Plaintiff has 

obtained leave to propound this 

discovery, defendant has until 

October 10, 2016, to respond.

Case 3:13-cv-00248-WQH-AGS Document 441 Filed 09/19/16 PageID.<pageID> Page 5 of 6
6

Although Plaintiff’s declarations filed in support of his motions to compel include 

requests for sanctions (ECF Nos. 410-4, 411-4, 412-4, 413-4, 414-4, 415-4, 416-4, 

417-4, 418-4, 419-4, 420-4 and 421-4), no motions for sanctions are before the 

Court. If the Court were to construe Plaintiff’s motions to compel as including 

motions for sanctions, those motions would be denied. Defendants were within their 

rights to refuse to respond to discovery that was propounded after the close of 

discovery and in the absence of Plaintiff seeking and obtaining leave from the Court 

to reopen discovery.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Date: September 19, 2016 Initials: JLB

Case 3:13-cv-00248-WQH-AGS Document 441 Filed 09/19/16 PageID.<pageID> Page 6 of 6