CDCR

Justin Romell Bredford v. Acosta

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaOctober 23, 20251:24-cv-01056California1,201 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 JUSTIN ROMELL BREDFORD, No. 1:24-cv-01056-SAB (PC) 11 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S

MOTION TO COMPEL

12 v. (ECF No. 31) 13 ACOSTA,

14 Defendant.

15 16 Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this action filed pursuant to 42 17 U.S.C. § 1983. 18 Currently before the Court is Defendant’s motion to compel, filed September 22, 2025. 19 (ECF No. 31.) 20 I. 21 BACKGROUND 22 This action is proceeding against Defendant Acosta for excessive force in violation of the 23 Eighth Amendment and retaliation in violation of the First Amendment. (ECF No. 13.) 24 Defendant filed an answer to the complaint on December 26, 2024. (ECF No. 21.) The 25 discovery and scheduling order was issued on January 23, 2025. (ECF No. 26.) 26 On September 22, 2025, Defendant filed the instant motion to compel. (ECF No. 31.) 27 Plaintiff has not filed an opposition and the time to do so has…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.