United States District Court, N.D. California, Eureka Division
ORDER DKT. NOS. 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
NANDOR
J. VADAS, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Plaintiff,
a state prisoner, proceeds with a pro se civil rights
complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action continues
against two defendants and concerns their treatment of
plaintiff’s shoulder and back pain. Defendants filed a
motion for summary judgment on November 10, 2015. Plaintiff
has not filed an opposition; however, he has filed several
motions to compel discovery and a motion to appoint a medical
expert.
A.
Motions to Compel
A party
may bring a motion to compel discovery when another party has
failed to respond or respond adequately to a discovery
request. Fed.R.Civ.P. 37(a)(3). A party may “obtain
discovery regarding any nonprivileged matter that is relevant
to any party’s claim or defense . . . .”
Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(b)(1).
1.
Motion to Compel the Production of Documents (Docket No. 27)
Plaintiff
moves the court to compel defendants to respond to seven
document requests:
1. Any and all documents that refer to or relate to policies,
procedures, and practices in effect for health care at
Pelican Bay State Prison during the time the defendants
provided health care to plaintiff, including [plaintiff
requests approximately 43 chapters of various regulations and
procedures];
2. Any and all medical records relating to the health care
provided by defendants, including any members of the primary
care team, to plaintiff from July 1, 2010, until the present;
3. Any and all documents identified by defendants Ikegbu and
Adam in response to interrogatories;
4. Any and all documents directed to health care providers at
Pelican Bay State Prison regarding the health care to be
provided to inmate-patients, and generated by health care
supervisors, including Michael Sayre and Maureen McClean;
5. Any and all grievances and complaints lodged against
defendants alleging inadequate health care for pain or
musculoskeletal condition that was filed in the last five
years;
6. Any and all documents used by defendant Ikegbu in setting
the amount and frequency of plaintiff’s pain medication
dosages and in deciding not to refer plaintiff to a
specialist; and
7. Any and all documents used by defendant Adam in setting
the amount and frequency of plaintiff’s pain medication
dosages and in deciding not to refer plaintiff to a
specialist.
With
respect to requests 1, 2, 4, 6 and 7, defendants replied that
they would provide the documents requested, but noted that
plaintiff would need to pay copying costs because the
documents total more than 1, 000 pages. Defendants noted that
plaintiff could also obtain the regulations and policies of
the prison as requested in request 1, from the CDCR.
Defendants also argued that the more than 40 chapters
requested were over-broad and irrelevant. Defendants ...