Pickett

(PC) Mendoza v. Pickett

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaFebruary 6, 20202:18-cv-00553California801 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JOHN G. MENDOZA, No. 2:18-cv-0553-EFB P Plaintiff, v. ORDER S. PICKETT, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in this action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, has filed four discovery-related motions (ECF Nos. 17-20). Defendants oppose the motions. ECF No. 21. For the reasons stated below, the motions are denied. In the first motion, titled, “motion for discovery,” plaintiff filed a request for production of documents. ECF No. 17. Discovery requests, however, shall only be filed with the court if they are at issue. See E.D. Cal. Local Rules 250.2-250.4. At this time, there is no court proceeding that requires the court’s review of plaintiff’s discovery requests. To the extent plaintiff intended to serve defendants with his discovery requests by filing them with the court, the approach is improper. More significant, however, is that the deadline for serving requests…

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.