UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
January 25, 2010
DESHA M. CARTER, PLAINTIFF,
C. MUNOZ, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Sandra M. Snyder United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION (Doc. 39)
Plaintiff Desha M. Carter, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on November 30, 2007. On November 2, 2009, Plaintiff filed a motion seeking a court order allowing him to correspond with his inmate witnesses, and an order requiring Defendants to locate and make available his inmates witnesses for depositions, oral or by written questions.
As explained in the Court's order denying Plaintiff's motion to compel, Defendants have no legal duty to bear the costs or otherwise assist Plaintiff in deposing witnesses. If this matter goes to trial, Plaintiff will be provided with the opportunity to file a motion seeking the attendance of inmate witnesses at trial. If the Court grants the motion, it will verify the inmates' current locations and issue writs requiring their production for trial.*fn1 However, neither the Court nor Defendants are responsible for setting up depositions for Plaintiff and bearing the costs. Therefore, Plaintiff's motion as it pertains to deposing his inmate witnesses is denied.
To the extent Plaintiff's motion is properly construed as seeking assistance from the Court in facilitating his ability to correspond with his inmate witnesses to obtain declarations and other discoverable information, his motion is untimely. The discovery phase of this litigation is closed, and Plaintiff did not previously seek a court order requesting assistance in communicating with his inmate witnesses to obtain declarations. Plaintiff's previous motion to compel, which was stricken for lack of signature without prejudice to renewal within thirty days, sought assistance in deposing the inmates by written question, an issue that has been resolved.
Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff's motion regarding his inmate witnesses, filed November 2, 2009, is HEREBY DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.