UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
August 21, 2008
DERRICK LEE BILLUPS, PLAINTIFF,
A. RAMIREZ, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Sandra M. Snyder United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER DENYING AMENDED MOTION TO COMPEL (Doc. 33)
Plaintiff Derrick Lee Billups ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On March 25, 2008, Plaintiff filed a timely motion to compel, and Defendants filed an opposition on April 25, 2008. The Court denied the motion to compel without prejudice to renewal in an order filed on July 3, 2008. In the order, the Court stated
As the party moving to compel, Plaintiff must inform the Court which discovery requests are the subject of his motion to compel, and, for each disputed response, inform the Court why the information sought is relevant and why Defendants' objections are not justified. Plaintiff may not simply assert that he has served discovery requests, that he is dissatisfied, and that he wants an order compelling responses. Plaintiff's motion neither identifies which interrogatories are subject to the motion to compel nor makes any showing as to relevancy or why Defendants' objections are not justified. (Doc. 31, 1:18-24.)
Plaintiff filed an amended motion to compel on July 18, 2008, and Defendants filed an opposition on July 29, 2008. Plaintiff's amended motion does not identify which interrogatories are in dispute and set forth the relevancy of the information sought for each interrogatory in dispute.*fn1
Because Plaintiff has not met his burden as the moving party, Plaintiff's amended motion to compel, filed July 18, 2008, is HEREBY DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.