(PC) Hamilton v. Son ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DAVID HAMILTON, No. 2:19-cv-2210 JAM AC P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 M. SON, 15 Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 18 § 1983, has filed a motion to compel discovery, ECF No. 26, which defendant opposes, ECF No. 19 29. 20 On November 7, 2021,1 plaintiff filed a motion to compel the production of confidential 21 records related to health care staff complaints made against defendant Son. ECF No. 26. 22 Defendant opposes the motion on the grounds that plaintiff failed to attach a copy of the 23 discovery requests at issue and that the motion is premature because the only request for 24 production he received was served on October 21, 2021. ECF No. 29. In reply, plaintiff attaches 25 a copy of a request for admissions dated October 4, 2021; he argues that his motion was not 26 27 1 This date reflects the application of the prison mailbox rule. Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 276 (1988) (establishing rule that a prisoner’s court document is deemed filed on the date the 28 prisoner delivered the document to prison officials for mailing). 1 premature because it was filed before the November 8, 2021 deadline for serving discovery. ECF 2 No. 31. 3 By order filed September 3, 2021, the undersigned set a schedule for discovery in this case 4 that provided that discovery closed on January 7, 2022, and that “[a]ll requests for discovery 5 pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 31 (deposition by written question), 33 6 (interrogatories), 34 (production of documents), or 36 (admissions) shall be served no later than 7 November 8, 2021.” ECF No. 24 at 5 (emphasis in original). The order further provided that 8 responses to written discovery requests were due forty-five days after service of the request. Id. 9 In other words, written requests for discovery had to be sent by November 8, 2021, and the party 10 to whom they were sent had forty-five days to respond. Plaintiff appears to have misunderstood 11 the order to mean that responses to discovery were due by November 8, 2021, regardless of when 12 they were served. Because plaintiff did not serve his request for production until October 21, 13 2021, defendant’s response was not due until December 9, 2021.2 Plaintiff’s motion to compel 14 was therefore premature and will be denied. 15 To the extent plaintiff’s reply was attempting to expand the motion to include responses to 16 his request for admissions, the motion will also be denied. If plaintiff wishes to file a motion to 17 compel related to the substance of defendant’s responses, he may do so. The current deadline for 18 motions to compel is January 7, 2022, and any such motion must include a copy of and 19 specifically identify the requests and responses at issue and explain why the responses are 20 deficient or the objections improper. 21 Plaintiff’s reply to the motion to compel was also accompanied by a request for copies. 22 ECF No. 30. It is not the practice of this court to provide copies without payment of the 23 appropriate fees, regardless of whether a party is proceeding in forma pauperis. If plaintiff would 24 like copies of any documents, the Clerk’s Office provides copies of documents at $0.50 per page, 25 2 Since the forty-fifth day fell on a Sunday, the deadline was continued to Monday, December 6, 26 2021. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(a)(1)(C) (when deadline falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, it is continued to the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday). 27 Defendant was then entitled to an additional three days because the deadline was based on the date of service. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d) (when service is made by mail, “3 days are added after 28 the period would otherwise expire under Rule 6(a)”). 1 | and any requests for copies must be accompanied by the appropriate fees. 2 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 3 1. Plaintiff's motion to compel, ECF No. 26, is DENIED. 4 2. Plaintiffs motion for copies, ECF No. 30, is DENIED. 5 || DATED: December 22, 2021 ~ 6 Htttenr— Lhar—e_ ALLISON CLAIRE 7 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28