Opinion
21cv2012-LL-AGS
03-21-2022
ELOY MASCORRO, Plaintiff v. THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO; THE SAN DIEGO SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT SAN DIEGO SHERIFF; SHERIFF DEPUTIES; JAIL STAFF; C.L.E.R.B., Defendants
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTIONS RE: DISCOVERY AND REQUEST FOR MORE TIME
[ECF NO. 14]
Honorable Linda Lopez United States District Judge
On March 13, 2022, Plaintiff, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, moved ex parte for an order to the County of San Diego “to provide me with all names of employees involved in all incidents described in my complaint so that I can properly name all defendants without the time given to me by the Court.” ECF No. 14. Because discovery had not yet commenced in this case, this motion is DENIED without prejudice.
Plaintiff also requests to “allow more time for cases 21cv2012-LL-AGS and 21-cv-1725-LL-AGS due to the fact I had no official access to them through my CM/ECF account and was not aware that a summons had been issued and as I stated in an earlier motion[.]” Id. at 2. It is unclear for what Plaintiff seeks “more time” in 21cv2012-LL-AGS and 21-cv-1725-LL-AGS. In both cases, Plaintiff has been granted permission to file documents and receive notifications using the Court's CM/ECF system without charge and in accordance with ECF Administrative Policies and Procedures. ECF No. 8 at 6-7. As such, it is unclear how Plaintiff was unaware that summonses were issued in both cases. Accordingly, this motion is DENIED without prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.