UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
May 10, 2012
JEANNE S. WOODFORD, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Sheila K. Oberto United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO DEPOSE PLAINTIFF BY VIDEO-CONFERENCE (Doc. 132)
Plaintiff Edward Demerson, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on January 29, 2008, and a scheduling order was issued on December 21, 2011. This action is currently in the discovery phase, and on April 25, 2012, Defendants filed a request seeking leave to depose Plaintiff by video-conference. Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(b)(4). Plaintiff filed an opposition on May 7, 2012. *fn1
Plaintiff's opposition to the request is based on several misconceptions. A deposition by video-conference simply means that Defendants will conduct it from a remote location via video-conferencing equipment. The taking of the deposition itself entails nothing different or additional, and Plaintiff is not at a disadvantage, as he asserts. Plaintiff has the same right to request to review the deposition transcript and make corrections as he would with an in-person deposition, Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(e)(1), and in neither instance is Plaintiff entitled to a free copy of the transcript, Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(f)(3). *fn1
Defendants may seek leave to depose Plaintiff by remote means and they have done so here.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(b)(4). Although Defendants are not required to show good cause under the rule, the conservation of government resources is good cause under the circumstances and Defendants' motion is HEREBY GRANTED. Id.
IT IS SO ORDERED.