(PC)Thomas
(PC)Thomas v. Doe
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ERNEST THOMAS, Case No. 1:24-cv-01319-HBK (PC)
Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION TO COMPEL AS PREMATURE
v. (Doc. No. 10) JANE DOE,
Defendant.
16 Plaintiff, a state prisoner confined within the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (“CDCR”), is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action. On January 6, 2025, Plaintiff filed his First Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 9, “FAC”) in response to the Court’ November 8, 2024 Screening Order. The Court has not yet screened the FAC. Plaintiff accompanied his FAC with a Motion to Compel. (Doc. No. 10). Citing to CDCR regulations, Plaintiff requests the Court to direct CDCR to provide him access to certain surveillance video and body camera footage from October 27, 2023 through October 30, 2023. (Id. at 4). The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure distinguish between parties and non-parties in establishing available discovery…