Opinion
1:21-cv-01036-ADA-EPG (PC)
10-17-2022
LEOBARDO ERIC RAMOS, Plaintiff, v. MAYFIELD, et al., Defendants.
ORDER RE: ORAL DEPOSITION OR DEPOSITIONS BY WRITTEN QUESTIONS (ECF NO. 61)
Leobardo Ramos (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
On October 13, 2022, Plaintiff filed a document titled “Oral Deposition or Depositions by Written Questions.” (ECF No. 61). Plaintiff states that he is moving “the case forward by written questions.” (Id. at 1). Plaintiff includes eight numbered paragraphs, which appear to be questions directed to defendant Mayfield. At the end of the filing, Plaintiff states that four inmate witnesses were interviewed, and asks the Court to allow him to take oral depositions of these inmate witnesses.
It is not clear why Plaintiff filed his questions directed to defendant Mayfield with the Court. Plaintiff does not ask the Court for any relief. The Court notes that there is no indication that Plaintiff noticed a deposition by written questions or sent the questions to an officer, as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 31. The Court also notes that Plaintiff may serve interrogatories on Defendant pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 33 without noticing a deposition by written questions.
As to Plaintiff's request for the Court to allow him to take oral depositions of four inmate witnesses, that request will be denied. As the Court previously informed Plaintiff, if Plaintiff wants to take a deposition, Plaintiff must show “the ability to comply with the applicable Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by providing the name of the person to be deposed, the name and address of the court reporter who will take the deposition, the estimated cost for the court reporter's time and the recording, and the source of funds for payment of that cost.” (ECF No. 57, pgs. 2-3). While Plaintiff provided the names of the persons to be deposed, Plaintiff failed to include any of the other required information.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's request for the Court to allow him to take oral depositions of four inmate witnesses is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.