ORDER

DANIEL J. ALBREGTS, Magistrate Judge.

This matter is before the Court on pro se Plaintiff's Motions to Compel (ECF Nos. 49 and 51), filed on December 12 and 17, 2019.

Plaintiff moves for production of discovery documents from Defendant related to personnel files and training records of other employees of Defendant. Under Local Rule 26-7(c), discovery motions will not be considered unless the movant (1) has made a good-faith effort to meet and confer as defined by Local Rule IA 1-3(f) before filing the motion, and (2) includes a declaration setting forth the details and results of the meet-and-confer conference about each disputed discovery request. Local Rule IA 1-3(f)(1) requires that in order to satisfy the meet and confer provision above, the parties must communicate directly and discuss in good faith the issues in dispute. The Court further notes that, although claims made by pro se plaintiffs are to be construed liberally, they are still bound by the federal rules of procedure. Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 54 (9th Cir. 1995).

Here, Plaintiff has not certified that a good-faith effort was made to meet and confer, nor has he explained the substance of the dispute that remains for the requested material. The Court will therefore deny Plaintiff's motions without prejudice. After fulfilling the meet and confer obligations, Plaintiff may refile a motion to compel if there is a remaining dispute. Accordingly,

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion to Compel (ECF No. 49) is denied without prejudice.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED Plaintiff's Motion to Compel (ECF No. 51) is denied without prejudice.