IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
May 20, 2009
JIMMIE GHOLSON, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS,
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Proud, Magistrate Judge
Before the Court is plaintiff's motion to compel the defendants to turnover: (1) a copy of a videotape of F-Unit/D-Range from January 5, 2004, at 6:20 a.m.; and (2) photos of plaintiff's injury taken by Lt. Lockridge. (Doc. 108). Also before the Court is the defendants' response. (Doc. 109). The defendants indicate that they did send plaintiff copies of he photos of his injuries (albeit in the form of color photo copies). With respect to the videotape, the defendants explain that they objected to that specific discovery request, citing security concerns.
Plaintiff has not submitted copies of his original discovery requests for the videotape and photographs, and the defendants' response (if any), as required by Local Rule 26.1(b)(3). Therefore, his motion is not properly before the Court. In any event, the motion appears to be moot relative to the photos of plaintiff's injuries. Plaintiff has offered no argument regarding the defendants seemingly sound objection to turning over the videotape.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that plaintiff's motion to compel (Doc. 108) is DENIED in all respects.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
CLIFFORD J. PROUD U. S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.