Opinion
Civil Action No. 08-cv-00756-LTB-BNB.
October 20, 2008
ORDER
This matter is before me on the following motions filed by the plaintiff (the "Motions"):
1. Motion for Court to Subpoena Discovery Evidence [Doc. #39, filed 10/3/08],
2. Motion for Delay in Proceedings [Doc. #40, filed 10/3/08],
3. Motion for Court to Subpoena Discovery Evidence [Doc. #43, filed 10/7/08], and
4. Motion for Delay in Proceedings [Doc. #44, filed 10/7/08].
The plaintiff's motions for subpoenas are identical and state the following:
I have requested material which is essential to prove my claim, and yet have been denied these documents because of my indigent status.
Without the court intervening I fear the discovery materials I need will not be given.
A motion must "state with particularity the grounds for seeking the order" and "state the relief sought." Fed.R.Civ.P. 7(b)(1)(B) and (C). The plaintiffs' motions are incomprehensible. It is impossible to determine what relief is sought or the grounds for the relief. The plaintiff does not describe the documents, he does not state who refused to provide them, and he does not provide any details regarding the denial.
I previously denied without prejudice a request by the plaintiff to subpoena materials from nonparties because the plaintiff did not provide any information from which I could determine if his request was reasonable [Doc. #36]. The record does not, however, reflect that the plaintiff has been denied documents because of his indigent status.
The plaintiff's motions to delay proceedings are also identical. The plaintiff requests that the Court delay proceedings for an unspecified amount of time because he is in the process of being transferred to the Colorado Department of Corrections and he will not have "access to do legal research that would allow [him] to properly present [his] case." The plaintiff does not identify any matters currently pending that require research nor does he explain why research is necessary to present his case.
IT IS ORDERED that the plaintiff's Motions are DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the plaintiff shall cease filing redundant motions.