Fine

(PC) Singanonh v. Fine

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaAugust 31, 20212:18-cv-01824California755 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 TIENGKHAM SINGANONH, No. 2:18-cv-1824 KJM AC P Plaintiff, v. ORDER R. FINE, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a former state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Currently pending before the court is defendant’s motion to compel. ECF No. 52. The scope of discovery under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(1) is broad. Discovery may be obtained as to “any nonprivileged matter that is relevant to any party’s claim or defense and proportional to the needs of the case.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(1). “Information within this scope of discovery need not be admissible in evidence to be discoverable.” Id. The court, however, may limit discovery if it is “unreasonably cumulative or duplicative, or can be obtained from some other source that is more convenient, less burdensome, or less expensive;” or if the party who seeks discovery “has had ample opportunity to obtain the…

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.