Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Gomez v. Chenik

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


February 24, 2009

SILVESTER GOMEZ, PLAINTIFF,
v.
CHENIK, M.D., ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Arthur L. Alarcón United States Circuit Judge

ORDER

Silvester Gomez ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. On February 20, 2009, Plaintiff filed a request for an extension of time to produce documents requested and responses to interrogatories propounded by Defendants, on the ground that the documents Defendants are requesting are in the possession of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR), specifically BWDF. (Doc. 47). According to Plaintiff, BWDF has refused to provide Plaintiff with copies of the requested documents. Id.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Defendants are hereby ORDERED to respond to Plaintiff's request for an extension of time on or before Tuesday, March 3, 2009.

2. In their response, Defendants are directed:

a) to indicate whether any of the documents requested by Defendants are accessible to Defendants, or their counsel, by virtue of Defendants' employment within the CDCR;

b) to identify which documents they are seeking, if any, that are likely to be within the custody and control of CDCR, or another state entity;

c) to identify who, within the CDCR, or other state entity, are the proper custodians of such records, if that information is known to, or easily discoverable by, Defendants;

d) to address the issue whether the issuance of non-party subpoenas will be necessary to effectuate the production of the documents Defendants are requesting, and bring about the occurrence of timely discovery in this civil rights case; and,

e) to indicate whether there is any objection to the extension requested by Plaintiff.

20090224

© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.