Gholson v. NaphCare Inc., 2:18-cv-00573-RFB-NJK. (2019)
Court: District Court, D. Nevada
Number: infdco20190628d54
Visitors: 6
Filed: Jun. 26, 2019
Latest Update: Jun. 26, 2019
Summary: Order [Docket No. 20] NANCY J. KOPPE , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and has filed a letter from his doctor. Docket No. 20. The Court construes this filing as a discovery disclosure. Plaintiff is instructed that discovery and discovery related-documents must be served on Defendant's counsel, not be filed on the docket. See Local Rule 26-8; see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(d)(1). Although the Court declines to strike the initial disclosures in this instance, it may s
Summary: Order [Docket No. 20] NANCY J. KOPPE , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and has filed a letter from his doctor. Docket No. 20. The Court construes this filing as a discovery disclosure. Plaintiff is instructed that discovery and discovery related-documents must be served on Defendant's counsel, not be filed on the docket. See Local Rule 26-8; see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(d)(1). Although the Court declines to strike the initial disclosures in this instance, it may st..
More
Order
[Docket No. 20]
NANCY J. KOPPE, Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and has filed a letter from his doctor. Docket No. 20. The Court construes this filing as a discovery disclosure. Plaintiff is instructed that discovery and discovery related-documents must be served on Defendant's counsel, not be filed on the docket. See Local Rule 26-8; see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(d)(1). Although the Court declines to strike the initial disclosures in this instance, it may strike future discovery that is filed on the docket improperly.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
