Barber
(PC) Wilkins v. Barber
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 KEENAN WILKINS, aka NERRAH No. 2:19-cv-1338 WBS KJN P
BROWN,
12 Plaintiff, ORDER v. 14 DR. CHRISTINE S. BARBER, et al., 15 Defendants.
17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding pro se, in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On September 1, 2021, plaintiff filed a motion for appointment of a medical expert under Rule 706(a) of the Federal Rules of Evidence, which is now fully briefed. As set forth below, plaintiff’s motion is denied without prejudice. Plaintiff’s Motion Plaintiff requests a court-appointed medical expert under Rule 706(a) of the Federal Rules of Evidence “to assist [the court in] comprehend[ing] material issues in this action as well as for a forward looking technique for promoting a fair trial. (ECF No. 188 at 1-2.) Plaintiff claims that defendants retained a medical expert in preparation for their motion for summary judgment, and states “this expert will say everything defendants want them to say in the bias routine allowed…