Rodriguez

(PC) Bivins v. Rodriguez

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJanuary 8, 20202:18-cv-02671California268 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JOHN PENN BIVINS, No. 2:18-CV-2671-JAM-DMC-P Plaintiff, v. ORDER MARCO RODRIGUEZ, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Bivens v. Six Unknown Federal Narcotics Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). Pending before the court is plaintiff’s motion for contempt (ECF No. 63). Plaintiff seeks an order of contempt against defendant Sarabia “for ignoring several subpoenas and withholding key evidence and information in a federal lawsuit.” ECF No. 63, pg. 1. Plaintiff provides no supporting information, argument, or documentation. Plaintiff’s motion will be denied. To the extent plaintiff seeks sanctions for failure to provide discovery, his motion is premature in that the court has not issued a scheduling order opening discovery. Moreover, as a motion to compel discovery and for an award of sanctions, plaintiff’s…

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.