IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
March 5, 2009
JAMES JENNINGS, PLAINTIFF,
THERESA SCHWARTZ, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Arthur L. Alarcón United States Circuit Judge
On February 2, 2009, Defendants mailed discovery requests to Plaintiff James Jennings ("Plaintiff") that asked for his compliance by March 19, 2009. (Doc. 35). On February 23, 2009, Plaintiff filed a motion for a thirty-day extension to respond to Defendants' discovery requests. (Doc. 32). Plaintiff asserts that an extension is warranted because he proceeds pro se and has limited access to the law library. (Id.).
On March 3, 2009, Defendants filed a response to Plaintiff's request for an extension. (Doc. 34). Additionally, Defendants filed the "Request for Production of Documents to Plaintiff from Defendant Dr. Bick (Set One)," (Doc. 35), in support of their contention that the "Requests for Production" "are drafted in simple language, designed for any layperson to understand, and require no legal research." (Doc. 34 at 2).
Plaintiff has failed to show why a thirty-day extension is necessary in light of Defendants' discovery request. The breadth, nature, and form of Defendants' requests do not warrant a thirty-day extension.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff furnish a response to Defendants' discovery requests on or before April 2, 2009.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.