From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Washington v. Adams

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jul 13, 2012
CASE NO. 1:09-cv-01666-AWI-SKO PC (E.D. Cal. Jul. 13, 2012)

Opinion

CASE NO. 1:09-cv-01666-AWI-SKO PC

07-13-2012

CHRISTOPHER N. WASHINGTON, Plaintiff, v. DERRAL G. ADAMS, Defendant.


ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION

TO COMPEL AS PREMATURE, STRIKING

INTERROGATORIES, AND STAYING

ACTION PENDING SETTLEMENT

CONFERENCE


(Docs. 103 and 104)

Plaintiff Christopher N. Washington, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on September 21, 2009. This action is proceeding on Plaintiff's second amended complaint, filed on March 24, 2011, against Defendant Adams for violation of Plaintiff's rights under the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.

On July 5, 2012, Plaintiff filed a motion to compel. The order opening the discovery phase of this action was filed on May 18, 2012, and served on Plaintiff by mail. (Doc. 84.) Pursuant to the order, the responding party has forty-five days within which to serve responses to discovery requests. (Id.)

Further, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(d) provides for the addition of three days to the forty-five day time period.

Given the date discovery opened, it is not possible for Plaintiff to have served discovery requests, waited for a timely response, and filed a ripe motion to compel. Indeed, Plaintiff's motion indicates the discovery requests to which he believes he is entitled to compel a response were not served until June 6, 2012. (Doc. 103, Washington Dec., court record p. 7, ¶1.) The motion is premature and it shall be denied on that ground.

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff's motion to compel, filed on July 5, 2012, is DENIED as premature;
2. Plaintiff's interrogatories, filed on July 5, 2012, are STRICKEN pursuant to paragraph 8 of the First Informational Order; and
3. This action is STAYED pending the settlement conference set for July 30, 2012.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

Sheila K. Oberto

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Washington v. Adams

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jul 13, 2012
CASE NO. 1:09-cv-01666-AWI-SKO PC (E.D. Cal. Jul. 13, 2012)
Case details for

Washington v. Adams

Case Details

Full title:CHRISTOPHER N. WASHINGTON, Plaintiff, v. DERRAL G. ADAMS, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Jul 13, 2012

Citations

CASE NO. 1:09-cv-01666-AWI-SKO PC (E.D. Cal. Jul. 13, 2012)