Opinion
Case No. 3:09-cv-1643 (CFD) (TPS).
February 28, 2011
RULING AND ORDER
Plaintiff has filed two motions seeking court assistance in obtaining discovery materials in this case. The court has previously explained to plaintiff that discovery requests should not be filed with the court. See Doc. ## 20, 37. In addition, the court has explained in prior rulings that, if he is not satisfied with responses to his discovery requests, plaintiff must file a motion to compel that complies with local court rules. See Doc. #30. Accordingly, plaintiff's motions [Docs. ##38, 49] are DENIED.
Plaintiff also has filed a document entitled "Motion for Order Mark Ready for Ruling" in which he seeks the opportunity to respond to all motions before a ruling is entered. Plaintiff does not have an absolute right to respond to every motion filed by defendants. For example, local court rules permit the court to rule ex parte on motions for extension of time. D. Conn. L. Civ. R. 7(b) 3.
Plaintiff also asks the court to schedule a status conference in this case. The court recently extended the discovery and dispositive deadlines. No status conference is required at this time. Plaintiff's motion [ Doc. #43] is DENIED. SO ORDERED this 28th day of February 2011, at Hartford, Connecticut.