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.

Uribe v. McGuinness

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


February 8, 2010

CESAR URIBE, PLAINTIFF,
v.
P.A. MCGUINNESS, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

ORDER

Pending before the Court are Plaintiff's Notice of Motion and Motion to Strike (Dkt. # 88), and Motion/Application for an Order to Show Cause Why a Contempt Citation Should Not Issue (Dkt. # 89). After consideration,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED denying the Motion to Strike (Dkt. # 88).

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED granting the Motion for an Order to Show Cause (Dkt. # 89). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:

1. The Custodian of Medical Records for the California Substance Abuse Treatment Facility and State Prison ("CSATF") telephonically appear before the Honorable G. Murray Snow on March 5, 2010 at 10:00 a.m. to show cause why the Custodian of Medical Records for CSATF should not be compelled to comply with the subpoena duces tecum for the production of material medical records. The parties are directed to call 602-322-7650.

2. Direct that the Clerk of the Court forward a copy of this Order, together with a copy of Plaintiff's Motion for an Order to Show Cause Why a Contempt Citation Should Not Issue (Dkt. # 89) to the United States Marshal for service.

3. The United States Marshal is directed to personally serve the Order, together with a copy of Plaintiff's Motion for an Order to Show Cause Why a Contempt Citation Should Not Issue on the Custodian of Medical Records at CSATF no later than February 18, 2010.

3. Within fourteen (14) days of service of copies of this Order and Motion for an Order to Show Cause, the Custodian of Medical Records shall file with the Clerk of the Court and serve on Plaintiff, a written response and/or submit the records requested. Any defenses to the motion shall be made in this written response and shall be supported by appropriate affidavits. Only those documents requested by the subpoena or brought into controversy by the responsive pleading shall be considered by the Court and any uncontested allegations in the motion shall be deemed admitted.

20100208

© 1992-2010 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.