IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
May 4, 2009
KEITH RUBEN BRIDGEWATER, PLAINTIFF,
LOCKART, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Craig M. Kellison United States Magistrate Judge
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the court is plaintiff's motion to compel (Doc. 41). As with his prior motion to compel filed on February 18, 2009, plaintiff states that he served interrogatories, requests for production, and requests for admissions on defendants. Plaintiff does not attach copies of the discovery requests to the current motion, though they are attached to the prior motion. In his prior motion, plaintiff asks the court to order defendants to "answer fully," to "produce for inspection all requested Documentation," and "that all 'REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS' be answered in their entirety." In the current motion, he asks the court to order defendants to respond to his meet-and-confer efforts. He does not, however, provide any indication of how defendants responded to his discovery requests or provide any argument as to how any particular response is inadequate. For this reason, it is impossible for the court to evaluate plaintiff's motion to compel or to grant any relief.
The court notes that discovery closed on February 27, 2009. The instant motion, therefore, is untimely. No further discovery requests may be served and no further motions to compel may be filed.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion to compel (Doc. 41) is denied.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.