Dharawat

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ROBERT LEWIS SMITH, Case No. 2:24-cv-0118-JDP (P) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 RAMESH DHARAWAT, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brought this action alleging that defendants 18 Dharawat, Ma, and Nnaji violated his Eighth Amendment right to adequate medical care. 19 Pending is his motion to compel, ECF No. 38, to which defendants have filed their oppositions, 20 ECF Nos. 39 & 40, and plaintiff has submitted a reply, ECF No. 45. After review of the 21 pleadings, I will deny plaintiff’s motion as untimely and as procedurally deficient. 22 As defendants correctly note, discovery, including the filing of any motions to compel, 23 was due July 11, 2025. ECF Nos. 33 & 35. Plaintiff’s motion to compel was not entered on the 24 docket until August 11, 2025, and, though the exact date on the pleading is difficult to read, there 25 is no question that it was drafted in August 2025. ECF No. 38 at 7. Plaintiff had notice of the 26…