Maddern

Maddern v. Austin

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaJanuary 28, 20223:21-cv-01298California3,214 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 Case No.: 21cv1298-MMA (BLM) RONALD MADDERN,

Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION FOR DISCOVERY

v. [ECF NO. 9] LLOYD AUSTIN in his capacity as Secretary of the United States Department of Defense, 16 Defendants.

18 Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s December 29, 2021 Motion for Discovery [ECF No. 9 (“Mot.”)], Defendant’s January 10, 2022 opposition to the motion [ECF No. 14 (“Oppo”)], and Plaintiff’s January 14, 2022 reply [ECF No. 17-1 (“Reply”)]. For the reasons set forth below, Plaintiff’s motion is DENIED. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND The above-entitled case was initiated on July 19, 2021, when Plaintiff filed a complaint pursuant to the Administrative Procedures Act. ECF No. 1. On December 3, 2021, Judge Anello issued a Scheduling Order requiring Defendant to lodge the Administrative Record (“AR”) by January 4, 2022, and ordering that dispositive motions the Administrative Procedures Act (“APA”) requires 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.