Bruce v. Sayre

          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 ...