Casilla

(PC) Muhammad v. Casilla

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMay 10, 20222:21-cv-00411California1,066 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 KIFA MUHAMMAD, No. 2:21-cv-0411 KJN P Plaintiff, v. ORDER MARIO CASILLAS, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding pro se, in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On March 30, 2022, under the mailbox rule, plaintiff filed a motion to compel discovery. Defendants filed an opposition and a supplemental opposition;1 plaintiff did not file a reply. As set forth below, plaintiff’s motion is denied. I. Discovery and Scheduling Order On November 22, 2021, a discovery and scheduling order issued setting the deadline for filing motions to compel discovery as April 1, 2022. (ECF No. 23.) “All requests for discovery pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 31, 33, 34 or 36 shall be served not later than sixty days prior to that date,” or January 31, 2022. (ECF No. 23 at 5.) Responses to written discovery requests were due forty-five days after the request was served. (Id.) 27 1 …

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.