ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTIONS AND COMPELLING PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS

GREG KAYS, Chief District Judge.

Now before the Court is Plaintiff's pro se Motion for Order Overruling Objections and Compelling Production of Documents (Doc. 81). Plaintiff asks this Court to reconsider the part of its September 20, 2017, ruling denying Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Production of Documents (Doc. 73).

Plaintiff argues the Court should reconsider its denial of his request to compel production of documents relating to requests 5, 9, 10, and 13. Those requests seek information relating to Defendants' employment records, including any complaints of misconduct. This Court emphasizes that the Eighth Circuit has declared that a police officer's personnel file contains confidential information which should not be released absent a clear reason for doing so. Donald v. Rast, 927 F.2d 379, 381 (8th Cir. 1991); see also Hazlett v. City of Pine Lawn, No. 4:12-CV-1715, 2014 WL 2441372, at *9 (E.D. Mo. May 30, 2014) ("The Court is reluctant to order the production of such information, particularly to [a] pro se party."). The court explained that the plaintiff "has not provided any showing, beyond mere speculation, that [the officer's] personnel records will contain information that is helpful to his case." Id.

Here, Plaintiff "has not provided any showing, beyond mere speculation, that [Defendant Officers'] personnel records will contain information that is helpful to his case." See id. Further, Plaintiff's motion provides no new information that was not before the Court when it made its ruling on September 20, 2017.

For these reasons, Plaintiff's Motion for Order Overruling Objections and Compelling Production of Documents (Doc. 81) is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.