Mayes

Ernest Lee Vaden v. Dr. Robert L. Mayes, et al.

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaNovember 18, 20252:19-cv-02216California509 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ERNEST LEE VADEN, No. 2:19-cv-2216 TLN CKD P Plaintiff, v. ORDER DR. ROBERT L. MAYES, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a California prisoner proceeding pro se with an action for violation of civil rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Defendants are the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) and two CDCR employees: Dr. Mayes and Chief Medical Executive Kuersten. Discovery is closed. Plaintiff seeks leave to serve 15 requests for production of documents, 15 interrogatories, and 15 requests for admissions. Plaintiff asserts that after the point he was no longer permitted to serve requests for discovery, he was provided evidence from defendants which necessitates further discovery. Newly discovered evidence is not, by itself, a reason to reopen discovery. Discovery can only be reopened if the moving party demonstrates diligence in conducting discovery before the deadline passed. …

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.