UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
September 12, 2008
JEFF S. HARNDEN, PLAINTIFF,
KEY, VOGEL, AND KEENER, DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gary S. Austin United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO COMPEL AND FOR SANCTIONS
I. RELEVANT PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Jeff S. Harnden ("plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pursuant to the scheduling order filed on March 7, 2006, the deadline for completion of all discovery, including motions to compel, was November 8, 2006. (Doc. 80.) On August 29, 2008, plaintiff filed a document entitled "Sanctions for Denial of Discovery Evidence." (Doc. 165.) Based on the title and content of plaintiff's document, the court concludes that plaintiff intends to bring a motion to compel discovery and for sanctions.
II. MOTION TO COMPEL AND FOR SANCTIONS
Plaintiff argues that the court should impose sanctions on defendants as a result of a discovery dispute. Plaintiff alleges that defendants violated a discovery order, falsified evidence, and failed to provide discovery requested by plaintiff.
The court's Discovery and Scheduling Order issued March 7, 2006, provided a deadline of November 8, 2006, for all discovery, including motions to compel. (Doc. 80.) Thus, plaintiff filed the instant motion to compel and for sanctions well after the deadline for the submission of such motions. Moreover, plaintiff previously brought similar motions to compel and for sanctions on January 30, 2007, and March 21, 2008, which were denied as untimely. Therefore, plaintiff's motion is untimely and shall be denied as such.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion to compel and for sanctions, filed August 29, 2008, is DENIED as untimely .
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2008 VersusLaw Inc.