Opinion
NO. 3:11-1195
11-26-2012
JONATHAN MALONE SR., Plaintiff, v. OFFICER MARK MOGHADDAM, et al., Defendants.
Judge Campbell/Bryant
Jury Demand
ORDER
Plaintiff Malone has filed his "Motion Requesting Release of Discovery and Production of Said Evidence" (Docket Entry No. 29), to which defendants have responded in opposition (Docket Entry No. 30). By this motion, plaintiff seeks production of certain video surveillance tapes, a taped video interview that plaintiff asserts he gave on May 4, 2011, and certain photographs of him allegedly taken by the medical staff at Rutherford County Detention Center on or about May 4, 2011 to May 7, 2011.
In response, defendants state that plaintiff's motion to compel production of the subject information is premature and without merit because plaintiff has not previously requested production of the subject information pursuant to Rule 34 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Defendants are correct. A motion to compel production of discovery under Rule 37 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires as a predicate a previous request for production under Rule 34. Rule 37(a)(3)(B)(iv). Plaintiff fails to show here that he has previously requested production of the subject information. Therefore, his motion to compel production is premature and must be DENIED.
It is so ORDERED.
________________________
JOHN S. BRYANT
United States Magistrate Judge