Staten v. Wang et al
Filing
38
ORDER granting 37 Motion to Stay discovery signed by Magistrate Judge Gerald B. Cohn on 11/7/2011. (Lundstrom, T)
<![CDATA[
1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
6
7
DWIGHT A. STATEN,
8
CASE NO. 1:09-cv-00801-GBC (PC)
Plaintiff,
9
v.
10
ORDER STAYING DISCOVERY PENDING
RESOLUTION OF DEFENDANT’S MOTION
TO REVOKE IN FORMA PAUPERIS AND
FOR RULE 11 SANCTIONS
J. WANG, et al.,
(Doc. 37)
11
Defendants.
/
12
13
Plaintiff is a prisoner proceeding pro se in a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
14
On October 14, 2011, Defendants Jones and Shelburn filed a motion to revoke Plaintiff’s in forma
15
pauperis status and for Rule 11 Sanctions. Doc. 34. On November 1, 2011, Defendants filed a
16
motion to stay discovery pending resolution of their prior motion. Doc. 37. Defendants allege that
17
Plaintiff served them with various discovery due November 14, 2011, and if they are forced to
18
respond, it will amount to thousands of dollars in expenses. Defs’ Mot., Decl. ¶¶ 3 & 4, Doc. 37.
19
Given that resolution of Defendants’ motion to revoke in forma pauperis and for Rule 11 Sanctions
20
may conclude this action and render any need for discovery moot, Discovery is HEREBY
21
ORDERED STAYED pending this Court’s ruling on the motion to revoke in forma pauperis and
22
Rule 11 Sanctions.1
23
IT IS SO ORDERED.
24
25
Dated:
0jh02o
November 7, 2011
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
26
27
28
1
Should this Court deny the motion to revoke in forma pauperis and for rule 11 sanctions, the Court will
lift this order staying discovery and reinstate the scheduling order or issue an amended scheduling order.
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
