Matches in SCALES for { <scales/DocketEntry/ilcd;;3:16-cv-03332_de43> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 5 of
5
with 100 items per page.
- ilcd;;3:16-cv-03332_de43 RegisterActionDate "2017-10-10" @default.
- ilcd;;3:16-cv-03332_de43 RegisterActionDescriptionText "TEXT ORDER entered by Chief Judge James E. Shadid on 10/10/2017. Plaintiff has one claim before the Court alleging Defendants 56589F6, 1403A76, 3C6C0EA and AB20CCE used excessive force against him on July 11, 2016. See April 3, 2017 Merit Review Order. The discovery deadline is currently set for October 27, 2017. See June 27, 2017 Minute Entry. Plaintiff has renewed his motion for appointment of counsel stating Defendants have continued to object to his discovery requests and he is dependent on Defendants to identify any John Doe Defendants. There are no John Does in this lawsuit, nor has Plaintiff made reference to John Doe Defendants. In addition, the Court has repeatedly advised Plaintiff how to file a motion to compel if he believes Defendants have improperly objected to his requests. See June 28, 2017 Scheduling Order, p. 5, para. 14; August 17, 2017 Text Order. The Court has also reminded Defendants if any redacted documents were provided to the Plaintiff, they must provide an un-redacted copy to the Court for in camera review. See August 17, 2017 Text Order. Finally, Plaintiffs claim is not complex and Plaintiff has at least some litigation experience. See ED8792E v. State Tactical Unit, Case No. 14-3295. Therefore, Plaintiff's renewed motion for appointment of counsel is denied 31 for the reasons previously stated by the Court. See April 3, 2017 Merit Review Order, p. 5. Plaintiff has also filed another motion to compel discovery asking the Court to order Defendants to provide a copy of any video footage from July 11, 2016 when he was assaulted. Defendants told Plaintiff they were unaware of the video, but a disciplinary report provided by Plaintiff makes reference to video footage. (Plain. Mot.,p. 2). Plaintiff also asks for further response to his unspecified discovery requests asking for the names of various individuals relevant to his claims. Although Plaintiff has again failed to provide a copy of Defendants discovery responses, Plaintiff is proceeding pro se. In order to manage discovery and move this case forward, Defendants are to provide a response to Plaintiff's motion to compel including copies of any relevant discovery responses. In addition, Defendants must address the video footage mentioned in the disciplinary report. Defendants' response must be filed within 21 days (10/31/2017) of this order.(VH, ilcd) (Entered: 10/10/2017)" @default.
- ilcd;;3:16-cv-03332_de43 AdministrativeID "None" @default.
- ilcd;;3:16-cv-03332_de43 hasJudgeReference SJ001502 @default.
- ilcd;;3:16-cv-03332_de43 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ilcd;;3:16-cv-03332_de41 @default.