Pamer v. Schwarzenegger et al
Filing
69
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 03/03/10 ordering that plaintiff's motion for court order and motion to compel 32 , 60 are denied. (Plummer, M)
<![CDATA[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 vs. ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, et al., Defendants. / Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the court are several motions Plaintiff has filed relating to his personal property, information on unserved defendants, and production of documents (Docs. 32, 60). To the extent Plaintiff is requesting documents through discovery, that request is denied. Discovery will open and Plaintiff will have an opportunity to submit proper discovery requests to the defendants once an answer is filed and this case is at issue. Defendants are not obligated to produce any documents until that time. Once discovery is open, Plaintiff may utilize proper discovery methods to obtain the information he is seeking. /// 1 LAWRENCE PAMER, Plaintiff, ORDER No. CIV S-07-1902-MCE-CMK-P IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
Plaintiff has also requested that defendants Tilton and Felker order their subordinates to produce, return or replace Plaintiff's personal property. To the extent Plaintiff is requesting the court issue an order against a non-party, this court is unable to issue such an order. The court cannot issue orders against individuals who are not parties to a suit pending before it. See Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc., 395 U.S. 100, 112 (1969). The request must, therefore, be denied. To the extent Plaintiff is requesting a court order for the defendants to return his personal property, that request is beyond the scope of this action. At issue in this action is Plaintiff's medical care and safety. To the extent he believes prison officials have violated his due process rights, he may seek judicial intervention by separate action as appropriate. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion for court order and motion to compel (Docs. 32, 60) are denied.
DATED: March 3, 2010 ______________________________________ CRAIG M. KELLISON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
2
]]>
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?
