Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_10-cv-00272/USCOURTS-caed-1_10-cv-00272-17/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

DENNIS L. HAMILTON, 

 Plaintiff,

 vs.

JOHN HART, et al.,

 Defendants.

1:10-cv-00272-DAD-EPG-PC

ORDER OPENING DISCOVERY

Dennis Hamilton (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 

pauperis with this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed the 

Complaint commencing this action on February 18, 2010. (ECF No.1.) This action now 

proceeds with the original Complaint, on Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment claims for (1) 

excessive force, against defendants C/Os Hart, Doe Lieutenant,1 Castro, Llamas, Prouty, 

Phillips, and Ronquillo; (2) inadequate medical care, against defendants C/Os Hart, Phillips, 

Bogle, Prouty, Ronquillo, Trupe and Ocampo; and (3) failure to protect Plaintiff, against 

defendants C/Os Phillips and Ronquillo.2 (Id.)

 

1

Plaintiff has not sufficiently identified the Doe Lieutenant to initiate service of process.

2 On April 30, 2013, the Court issued an order dismissing Plaintiff’s retaliation claim from this 

action for failure to state a claim, and dismissing defendants Scott, Durden, Perez, Gonzalez, and Massey from this 

action, for Plaintiff’s failure to state any claims against them upon which relief may be granted under 1983. (ECF 

No. 19.)

Case 1:10-cv-00272-DAD-EPG Document 85 Filed 09/14/16 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

On August 30, 2016, the Court issued an order setting a mandatory initial scheduling 

conference in this case for November 2, 2016 at 2:00 p.m. before Magistrate Judge Erica P. 

Grosjean. (ECF No. 81.) The order also required the parties to exchange initial disclosures

within sixty days. (Id.) On September 13, 2016, Defendants filed a request for reconsideration 

by the District Court of the order requiring initial disclosures. (ECF No. 83.)

In light of Defendants’ objection to initial disclosures, the Court now opens discovery, 

and all parties are given leave to serve discovery without delay. The Court will set the 

remainder of the schedule at the initial scheduling conference on November 2, 2016.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The discovery phase for this case is now opened; and

2. All parties are given leave to serve discovery without delay.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 14, 2016 /s/

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:10-cv-00272-DAD-EPG Document 85 Filed 09/14/16 Page 2 of 2