Opinion
Case No. 5:04cv387-RH/WCS.
June 9, 2006
ORDER
This case has been remanded to the undersigned following the granting in part and denying in part of Defendants' motion for summary judgment. Doc. 92. Summary judgment was denied as to the Eighth Amendment claim against Defendant Welch. Summary judgment was granted as to the retaliation claim against Defendant Welch and as to the claims against Defendants Solomon and Cherry and those Defendants are no longer part of this case. Id.
Still pending is Defendant Pandit's motion for summary judgment, doc. 74, which is ready for a ruling.
While the special report was designed to streamline the discovery process in cases of this nature, the Court realizes that the parties may wish to conduct further discovery prior to proceeding to an evidentiary hearing or trial. Indeed, Plaintiff has repeatedly requested discovery already in this case. Thus, the parties will be given an opportunity to file motions showing good cause to engage in additional discovery and detailing the nature and scope of any discovery they deem necessary. In showing good cause, such a motion must clearly demonstrate that there is a need for the materials sought, that the materials are relevant to developing material issues not already covered through the special report process, that the information is not otherwise available to the party, and the discovery is necessary to provide a full and fair hearing on the merits. Any proposed discovery requests should be attached to the motion. The parties shall not file a reply to any motion for discovery that may be filed until directed to do so by the Court.
Accordingly, it is
ORDERED:
1. The parties shall have until June 13, 2006, to file motions detailing the scope and nature of any further discovery necessary, and showing good cause for a need to conduct such discovery.
2. The Clerk shall return this file to the undersigned no later than June 13, 2006.
DONE AND ORDERED.