Opinion
1:19-cv-01724-DAD-EPG (PC)
12-14-2021
CLARENCE LONELL ROBERSON, Plaintiff, v. L.T., et al., Defendant.
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION REQUESTING DOCUMENTS (ECF NO. 59)
Clarence Lonell Roberson (“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 December 13, 2021, Plaintiff filed a motion requesting documents. (ECF No. 59.) Plaintiff's motion states:
Plaintiff now moves to request documents from KQA and Gonzalez defendants in this case to identify the Doe defendants. Plaintiff would also like to request a third party subpoena if this information is not available from Defendants KQA and Gonzalez.(Id.)
The Court will deny Plaintiff's motion. On November 22, 2021, the Court entered an order which, in relevant part, explained to Plaintiff that he may request documents from Defendants in order to identify the Doe defendants named in this case. (ECF No. 58.) The Court also informed Plaintiff that he could request a third-party subpoena if this information is not 1 available from Defendants. (Id.) Plaintiffs motion merely repeats this information. As noted in the Scheduling Order, Plaintiff should send his discovery requests directly to Defendants rather than filing them with the Court. (See ECF No. 55.)
The Court notes that Plaintiffs motion only generally requests documents regarding Doe defendants and does not describe what documents Plaintiff seeks. Plaintiffs discovery requests should describe the information he is requesting with enough detail to enable Defendants to respond. Plaintiff is also reminded that he has 120 days from the date of service of the Court's November 22, 2021 order to file a motion to substitute named defendants in place of the Doe defendants. (See ECF No. 58.)
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs motion requesting documents (ECF No. 59) is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED. 2