Asberry v. Biter, 1:16-cv-01741-LJO-MJS (PC). (2018)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20180403822
Filed: Mar. 30, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 30, 2018
Summary: ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR SEPARATE DEPOSITION HEARINGS (ECF NO. 105) MICHAEL J. SENG , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. The action proceeds on the following claims: an Eighth Amendment claim for deliberate indifference to a serious medical need against defendants Lozovoy and Relevante, an Eighth Amendment conditions of confinement claim against defendants Ferris and Godf
Summary: ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR SEPARATE DEPOSITION HEARINGS (ECF NO. 105) MICHAEL J. SENG , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. The action proceeds on the following claims: an Eighth Amendment claim for deliberate indifference to a serious medical need against defendants Lozovoy and Relevante, an Eighth Amendment conditions of confinement claim against defendants Ferris and Godfr..
More
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR SEPARATE DEPOSITION HEARINGS
(ECF NO. 105)
MICHAEL J. SENG, Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The action proceeds on the following claims: an Eighth Amendment claim for deliberate indifference to a serious medical need against defendants Lozovoy and Relevante, an Eighth Amendment conditions of confinement claim against defendants Ferris and Godfrey, and a First Amendment retaliation claim against defendants Ferris and Godfrey.
Before the Court is Plaintiff's March 5, 2018 motion seeking to be deposed on his claims against Lozovoy and Relevante separately from his claims against Ferris and Godfrey. (ECF No. 105.) Defendants respond to the motion stating that the issue was resolved informally and Plaintiff's deposition was conducted without incident on March 14, 2018. (ECF No. 109.) Plaintiff filed no response.
In light of Defendants' representations, Plaintiff's motion is moot and on that basis is HEREBY DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
