Filed: Mar. 20, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 20, 2015
Summary: Order JENNIFER A. DORSEY , District Judge . On March 18, 2015, pro se plaintiff "the Reverend Doctor Keith Alan Lasko, M.D., Doctor of Divinity (Hon.), Minister of the First Church of the Epiphany and Minister of the Worldwide Ministries of Jesus Christ" moved for leave to seek limited discovery from the American Board of Medical Specialties ("Specialties"). Doc. 214. The next day, I entered an omnibus order that, inter alia, denied Lasko's motion for leave to file an amended complaint, d
Summary: Order JENNIFER A. DORSEY , District Judge . On March 18, 2015, pro se plaintiff "the Reverend Doctor Keith Alan Lasko, M.D., Doctor of Divinity (Hon.), Minister of the First Church of the Epiphany and Minister of the Worldwide Ministries of Jesus Christ" moved for leave to seek limited discovery from the American Board of Medical Specialties ("Specialties"). Doc. 214. The next day, I entered an omnibus order that, inter alia, denied Lasko's motion for leave to file an amended complaint, di..
More
Order
JENNIFER A. DORSEY, District Judge.
On March 18, 2015, pro se plaintiff "the Reverend Doctor Keith Alan Lasko, M.D., Doctor of Divinity (Hon.), Minister of the First Church of the Epiphany and Minister of the Worldwide Ministries of Jesus Christ" moved for leave to seek limited discovery from the American Board of Medical Specialties ("Specialties"). Doc. 214. The next day, I entered an omnibus order that, inter alia, denied Lasko's motion for leave to file an amended complaint, dismissed all claims against Specialties, and explicitly informed Lasko that while he could seek to amend his complaint one more time against the American Board of Internal Medicine, his claims against Specialties are over. Doc. 216 at 13.
Although Specialties has not yet responded to Lasko's request for leave to conduct this additional discovery, Doc. 214, in the interests of judicial economy I resolve the motion now. Lasko's request seeks permission to propound what amounts to an interrogatory under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 33. Rule 33 provides a mechanism to propound interrogatories only on a "party." Because Specialties is no longer—and will never again be—a party in the case, Lasko may not propound Rule 33 interrogatories on Specialties. Accordingly, this motion is denied.1
Conclusion
It is HEREBY ORDERED that Lasko's Motion for Limited Discovery [Doc. 214] is DENIED.
FootNotes
1. In resolving Lasko's motion on this basis, I am by no means concluding that the discovery request was otherwise procedurally appropriate.
