Matches in SCALES for { <scales/DocketEntry/ilcd;;1:16-cv-01149_de71> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 6 of
6
with 100 items per page.
- ilcd;;1:16-cv-01149_de71 RegisterActionDate "2017-06-19" @default.
- ilcd;;1:16-cv-01149_de71 RegisterActionDescriptionText "TEXT ORDER: Plaintiff has filed a motion to produce asking Defendants to provide copies of documents. 44 Plaintiff must not send his discovery requests to the Court. Instead, Plaintiff must first send his discovery request directly to defense counsel. If Plaintiff then receives an inadequate response, he may file a motion to compel discovery, but he must follow the directions provided in the April 18, 2017 Scheduling Order. Plaintiff has also filed a motion for a video conference. 49 Plaintiff says he has not had adequate communication with defense counsel and he does not believe he is receiving a fair chance to litigate his claims. However, Plaintiff has not pointed to any specific problems. Defendants have filed a motion for summary judgment on the issue of exhaustion, and Plaintiff filed a response which directly responds to the statements of undisputed fact and provides relevant case law. Once the Court has an opportunity to review the motion and response, an order will be entered. In addition, the Court has entered a scheduling order providing information to assist the pro se litigant and requiring initial discovery. Plaintiff's motion is denied. 49 However, the Clerk is to provide Plaintiff with another copy of the April 18, 2017 Scheduling Order. Entered by Magistrate Judge Tom Schanzle Haskins. Entered by Magistrate Judge Tom Schanzle-Haskins on 6/19/2017. (MAS, ilcd) (Entered: 06/19/2017)" @default.
- ilcd;;1:16-cv-01149_de71 AdministrativeID "None" @default.
- ilcd;;1:16-cv-01149_de71 hasJudgeReference SJ001512 @default.
- ilcd;;1:16-cv-01149_de71 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ilcd;;1:16-cv-01149_de65 @default.
- ilcd;;1:16-cv-01149_de71 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ilcd;;1:16-cv-01149_de70 @default.