Free Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

1 2 3 4 5

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 v. N. Nelson, et al., Defendants. Barry Northcross Patterson, Plaintiff, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

CIV 04-603 PHX PGR (VAM) O R D E R

On June 28, 2005 and July 29, 2005, plaintiff filed Motions for Subpoenas. (Docs. 26, 28, 29). In these Motions plaintiff

states he has been unable to obtain affidavits from two staff members who are witnesses to the events of this case. He asks

that the Court issue subpoenas so that he may take the depositions of CO II Beck and CO III Puntney. As explained in this Court's Scheduling Order (Doc. 10), all discovery had to be completed by February 8, 2005. Discovery

disputes were to be brought to the Court's attention by April 8, 2005. (Doc. 10). In short, the discovery deadline has run and

this discovery dispute was not brought to the Court's attention in a timely manner. In addition, as explained in the Scheduling

Order, "[b]ecause of the logistical problems involved, selfrepresented incarcerated parties may not take depositions without prior Court permission. Such permission will not be granted (Id. at p.

except upon a showing of exceptional circumstances." Case 2:04-cv-00603-PGR-VAM Document 30 Filed 09/02/2005

Page 1 of 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

2).

Finally, there is a Motion to Dismiss pending.

For all of

these reasons, plaintiff's Motions for Subpoenas in order to take depositions will be denied. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED denying plaintiff's Motion for Subpoenas for witnesses. (Docs. 26, 28, 29).

DATED this 1st day of September, 2005.

2 Case 2:04-cv-00603-PGR-VAM Document 30 Filed 09/02/2005 Page 2 of 2