UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

JAMES WERDLOW,

Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION NO. 09-CV-11009

 VS. DISTRICT JUDGE VICTORIA A. ROBERTS

PATRICIA CARUSO, DEBORAH MAGISTRATE JUDGE MONA K. MAJZOUB

BEEKER, and ELIZABETH

LEVINE,

Defendants.

 /

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY (DOCKET

NO. 10)

This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Discovery filed on June

26, 2009. (Docket no. 10). No response has been filed and the time for response has now expired.

The matter has been referred to the undersigned for decision pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A).

(Docket no. 20). The Court dispenses with oral argument pursuant to E.D. Mich. LR 7.1(e). The

matter is now ready for ruling.

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, moves for an order to compel production of

documents from non-party custodians of records. Specifically, Plaintiff asks the Court to compel

Covenant Hospital to produce Plaintiff’s medical records and “other information” for the dates May

1, 2006 to present. Plaintiff also seeks an order to compel Saginaw Regional Facility (“SRF”)

Health Care Department to produce Plaintiff’s medical records, excerpts from 500 unit and SRF

control center log books with all information pertaining to Plaintiff from October 11, 2006 through

October 20, 2006, and “other information” from SRF Health Care Department pertaining to Plaintiff

1

2:09-cv-11009-VAR-MKM Doc # 16 Filed 11/16/09 Pg 1 of 3 Pg ID 170
from the dates May 1, 2006 to present. (Docket no. 10). Plaintiff seeks discovery from the nonparty custodians rather than Defendants in order to discourage tampering of the materials by the

Defendants. (Docket no. 10).

The Court finds that Plaintiff’s motion to compel is premature. This Court entered a Report

and Recommendation recommending that Defendant Caruso be dismissed from this lawsuit. 

(Docket no. 15). With regard to Defendants Beeker and Levine, the summonses were returned

unexecuted and proper service has not been completed. (Docket nos. 7, 8). Additionally, the

Plaintiff does not state that he attempted to obtain the records without Court intervention,

particularly with regard to his own medical records. The Court will therefore deny Plaintiff’s

motion to compel discovery because it was filed prematurely. Discovery should be served and

responded to without court involvement unless a problem develops which requires court

intervention. If this lawsuit proceeds, Plaintiff must attempt to obtain his medical records and

responses to his discovery requests without court intervention and, if that is unsuccessful, may file

a motion to compel after the time for responding has expired.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Discovery (docket no.

10) is DENIED without prejudice.

2

2:09-cv-11009-VAR-MKM Doc # 16 Filed 11/16/09 Pg 2 of 3 Pg ID 171
NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a), the parties have a period of ten days from the date of this

Order within which to file any written appeal to the District Judge as may be permissible under 28

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

Dated: November 16, 2009 s/ Mona K. Majzoub 

MONA K. MAJZOUB

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

PROOF OF SERVICE

 I hereby certify that a copy of this Order was served upon James Werdlow on this date.

Dated: November 16, 2009 s/ Lisa C. Bartlett 

Case Manager

3

2:09-cv-11009-VAR-MKM Doc # 16 Filed 11/16/09 Pg 3 of 3 Pg ID 172