Crudup v. Ward et al
Filing
24
ORDER GRANTING 21 Defendants' Motion to Conduct Plaintiff's Deposition Via Video Conference signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 11/8/2011. (Jessen, A)
<![CDATA[
1
2
3
4
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
6
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
7
8
MICHAEL CRUDUP,
9
CASE NO. 1:10-CV-00934-AWI-DLB PC
Plaintiff,
10
v.
11
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’
REQUEST TO CONDUCT PLAINTIFF’S
DEPOSITION VIA VIDEO CONFERENCE
J. WARD, et al.,
12
(DOC. 21)
Defendants.
13
/
14
15
Plaintiff Michael Crudup (“Plaintiff”) is a California state prisoner proceeding pro se and
16
in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On September 23,
17
2011, Defendants filed a request for permission to conduct Plaintiff’s deposition via video
18
conference. Plaintiff has not filed an opposition to Defendant’s request. Under Federal Rule of
19
Civil Procedure 30(b)(4), the Court may order that a deposition be taken by remote means.
20
Defendants’ counsel contends that permitting video conference deposition would eliminate
21
unnecessary travel expenses. Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that
22
Defendants’ request for permission to conduct Plaintiff’s deposition via video conference is
23
GRANTED. Nothing in this order shall be interpreted as requiring any penal institution to obtain
24
videoconferencing equipment if it is not already available.
25
26
27
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
77e0d6
November 8, 2011
/s/ Dennis L. Beck
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
28
1
]]>
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?
