Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Motions
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Motions
Judges

JAMES L. THOMPSON, Plaintiff, v. C/O MORALES, et al., Defendants.

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO SERVE INTERROGATORIES IN EXCESS OF RULE 33(A) LIMIT (Doc. 58) ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO SERVE RESPONSES TO DISCOVERY REQUESTS (Doc. 59) Deadline to Serve Discovery Responses: April 23, 2007 Motion to Compel Deadline: Thirty days after service of discovery responses

SANDRA SNYDER, Magistrate Judge

Plaintiff James L. Thompson ("plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The deadline for the completion of all discovery in this action is April 11, 2007. (Docs. 51, 55.) On February 28, 2007, plaintiff filed a motion seeking leave to serve interrogatories in excess of the limit of twenty-five set forth in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 33(a). On March 23, 2007, defendants filed a motion seeking an extension of time to serve responses to plaintiff's interrogatories, request for admissions, and request for the production of documents.

Plaintiff asserts that he needs to propound additional interrogatories in order to obtain additional facts regarding each defendant's involvement, and because the complexity of the case has caused him to need additional interrogatories. Plaintiff's conclusory assertions do not support a motion for leave to serve interrogatories in excess of twenty-five per defendant. Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(b)(2); Williams v. County of Sacramento Sheriff's Dep't, No. CIV S-03-2518 FCD DAD P, 2007 WL 587237, *1-2 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 26, 2007). The court finds that plaintiff has not met his burden as the moving party and his motion shall be denied.

Defendants' motion for an extension of time up to and including April 23, 2007, to serve discovery responses shall be granted. Plaintiff shall have thirty days from the date of service of defendants' discovery responses within which to file a motion to compel, if plaintiff deems one necessary after reviewing the responses.

Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff's motion seeking leave to serve interrogatories in excess of the limit of twenty-five set forth in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 33(a), filed February 28, 2007, is DENIED;
2. Defendants' motion seeking an extension of time to serve responses to plaintiff's interrogatories, request for admissions, and request for the production of documents, filed March 23, 2007, is GRANTED;
3. Defendants shall serve their discovery responses on or before April 23, 2007; and
4. Plaintiff shall have thirty (30) days from the date of service of defendants' responses within which to file a motion to compel, if he deems one necessary.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

THOMPSON v. MORALES
(Apr 2, 2007)