Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-01223/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-01223-12/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ROBERT LEE JENKINS,

Plaintiff,

v.

PERRY, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:07-CV-01223-DLB PC

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR ORDER

TO COMPEL

(ECF NO. 51)

Plaintiff Robert Lee Jenkins (“Plaintiff”) is a prisoner in the custody of the California

Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. Plaintiff is proceeding pro se in this civil rights

action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action is proceeding on Plaintiff’s first amended

complaint, filed May 1, 2008, against Defendants Perry, Jr., Bradford, Chalabian, and Williams

for violation of the Eighth Amendment. Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s “Motion For

Order to Compel F.R.C.P. Rule 26.” (ECF No. 51.) If this is a discovery request pursuant to

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26, Plaintiff should file with Defendants, not the Court. 

However, the Court will construe this as a motion to compel pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil

Procedure 37.

As stated in the Court’s Order, dated June 4, 2010, the discovery cut-off deadline was

December 1, 2009. (ECF No. 50.) Plaintiff is attempting to modify the Court’s Scheduling

Order, which requires a showing of good cause. Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). Plaintiff provides no

good cause for re-opening discovery at this time. Accordingly, the Court DENIES the motion. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: July 1, 2010 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

77e0d6 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

1

Case 1:07-cv-01223-DLB Document 52 Filed 07/02/10 Page 1 of 1