From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wilhelm v. Enenmoh

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Feb 15, 2013
Case No. 1:10-cv-01663-LJO-DLB PC (E.D. Cal. Feb. 15, 2013)

Opinion

Case No. 1:10-cv-01663-LJO-DLB PC

02-15-2013

STEVE WILHELM, Plaintiff, v. ANTHONY ENENMOH, et al., Defendants.


ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO DISMISS DEFENDANTS'

REQUEST FOR DEPOSITION AS MOOT


ECF No. 54

Plaintiff Steve Wilhelm ("Plaintiff") is a California state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action proceeds against Defendants Anthony Enenmoh and G. Miller for violation of the Eighth Amendment. On August 27, 2012, Plaintiff filed a motion, requesting that Defendants' second request for deposition by videoconference by denied. Plaintiff contends that Defendants had filed a notice with the Court on July 17, 2012 for the taking of a deposition on August 20, 2012, but failed to appear.

First, the motion is moot. The Court granted Defendants' August 17, 2012 request to conduct Plaintiff's deposition by videoconference. Second, an examination of the court docket indicates that there is no prior filing from Defendants requesting to take Plaintiff's deposition. Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion is HEREBY denied. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dennis L. Beck

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Wilhelm v. Enenmoh

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Feb 15, 2013
Case No. 1:10-cv-01663-LJO-DLB PC (E.D. Cal. Feb. 15, 2013)
Case details for

Wilhelm v. Enenmoh

Case Details

Full title:STEVE WILHELM, Plaintiff, v. ANTHONY ENENMOH, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Feb 15, 2013

Citations

Case No. 1:10-cv-01663-LJO-DLB PC (E.D. Cal. Feb. 15, 2013)