(PC) Spence v. Kaur
District Court, E.D. California
1Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 GERALD SPENCE, No. 2:16-cv-1828 TLN KJN P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 G. KAUR, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding pro se. Plaintiff’s motion to compel further 18 discovery responses and defendants’ motion to modify the scheduling order are before the court. 19 As set forth below, the undersigned grants in part and denies in part plaintiff’s motion to compel, 20 and denies defendants’ motion to modify the scheduling order. 21 I. Plaintiff’s Operative Pleading 22 This…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Dairl Johnson Claudine Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992
- Rhodes v. RobinsonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
- Mladen Zivkovic v. Southern California Edison CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
- William Hunt v. County of OrangeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
- Andrew H.K. Wong v. Regents of the University of CaliforniaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.