PRIEGO v. SULLIVAN, 14-cv-02366-JD. (2015)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20151216a78
Visitors: 22
Filed: Dec. 15, 2015
Latest Update: Dec. 15, 2015
Summary: ORDER JAMES DONATO , District Judge . Plaintiff, a state prisoner, proceeds with a civil rights complaint. He alleges that defendants were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs. Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment on June 8, 2015, that argued there was no deliberate indifference to serious medical needs and defendants were entitled to qualified immunity. Plaintiff has filed an opposition and defendants filed a reply. Plaintiff has also filed a motion to compel. T
Summary: ORDER JAMES DONATO , District Judge . Plaintiff, a state prisoner, proceeds with a civil rights complaint. He alleges that defendants were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs. Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment on June 8, 2015, that argued there was no deliberate indifference to serious medical needs and defendants were entitled to qualified immunity. Plaintiff has filed an opposition and defendants filed a reply. Plaintiff has also filed a motion to compel. Th..
More
ORDER
JAMES DONATO, District Judge.
Plaintiff, a state prisoner, proceeds with a civil rights complaint. He alleges that defendants were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs. Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment on June 8, 2015, that argued there was no deliberate indifference to serious medical needs and defendants were entitled to qualified immunity. Plaintiff has filed an opposition and defendants filed a reply. Plaintiff has also filed a motion to compel.
The Court previously stayed discovery until the threshold question of qualified immunity is settled. However, the Court did allow plaintiff to identify specific documents from his medical file that he requires to oppose summary judgment and does not possess and the Court would consider ordering them to be produced. Plaintiff seeks outcome study/data regarding his treatment on October 11, 2012, December 10, 2012, January 4, 2013, and April 16, 2013. He states they are referenced in the motion for summary judgment but he does not have them. Within fourteen (14) days, defendant shall either provide plaintiff this information, or respond why the information should not be provided.1
CONCLUSION
Within fourteen (14) days, defendant shall either provide the information discussed above or respond why the information should not be provided. The Court will rule on the motion to compel after defendant files a response.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
FootNotes
1. All of plaintiff's other requests are denied.
Source: Leagle
