Ghaznawi

Ghaznawi v. San Joaquin County

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaApril 26, 20242:22-cv-01988California5,128 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ABDUL GHAZNAWI, Case No. 2:22-cv-01988-MCE-CSK Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S

MOTION TO COMPEL AND DENYING

v. DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO STRIKE SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY, (ECF Nos. 20, 27) Defendant. 16 Presently before the Court is Defendant San Joaquin County’s motion to compel discovery responses pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(a), and his corresponding motion to strike Plaintiff Abdul Ghaznawi’s Joint Discovery Statement.1 (ECF Nos. 20, 27.) The Court held a hearing on April 10, 2024, wherein attorney Stanley Goff appeared for Plaintiff and attorney Suli Mastorakos appeared for Defendant. For the reasons that follow and as stated at the hearing, Defendant’s motion to compel is GRANTED and Defendant’s motion to strike Plaintiff’s Joint Discovery Statement is DENIED. As provided in more detail below, Plaintiff shall have until May 10, 2024 to serve supplemental responses to Defendant’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.