United States District Court, D. Nevada
ORDER RE ECF NO. 46
WILLIAM G. COBB UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
the court is Plaintiff Slaughter's Motion to Compel
Discovery and for Sanctions (ECF No. 46). Defendants
opposed Plaintiff's Motion to Compel/Motion for Sanctions
in a combined filing (ECF No. 51). No. timely reply has been
motion to compel addresses five (5) discovery requests served
as to Defendants Escamilla and Travis. The court will address
the disputed requests separately. First, however, the court
takes note of Defendants' contention Plaintiff did not
adequately meet and confer to attempt to resolve the
discovery disputes. (ECF No. 51 at 2.) While perhaps the
Plaintiff could have conversed in greater detail with the
Defendants' counsel, in view of the limitations facing an
inmate, particularly one who has been transferred to Arizona
for housing (see ECF No. 39), the court will not
deny Plaintiff's motion on that ground. That being said,
as discussed at pp. 6-7, even though the court is granting
certain of Plaintiff's requests for further discovery
responses against Defendants, the court is not granting
Plaintiff's sanctions by reason of Plaintiff's
failure to complete the meet and confer process.
court will now turn to the specified discovery responses to
which Plaintiff takes exception.
Plaintiff's Request for Production No. 4 to Defendant
Escamilla: REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF
DOCUMENTS NO. 4:
the documents written or electronic which identify the
work-shifts that you worked at ESP for each day beginning
[sic] from October 16, 2015 through October 26, 2015,
including shift logs.
TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS NO. 4:
produces the Shift Roster for ESP and time sheets for the
period of October 16, 2015 through October 26, 2015,
identified as SLAUGHTER 457: Def. Escamilla Resp. to
RFPD  001-011.
response needs to include the shift roster starting from
October 16, 2015, at 5:00 a.m. through October 16, 2015, 5:00
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS NO.
produce the shift roster for October 16, 2015, at 5:00 am
through October 16, 2015, 5:00 pm, identified as
SLAUGHTER 457: Def. Escamilla Resp. to RFPD 
opposition to Plaintiff's motion states Defendant
Escamilla “mistakenly only produced shift logs for
October 16 due to a typographical error when retyping
Slaughter's request. Defendants have attached the
responsive documents. See Exhibit A.” (ECF No. 51 at
A to Defendants' opposition submits 63 pages of shift
rosters pertaining to the subject time period. (ECF No. 51-1,
pp. 1-54.) Defendants' response appears to be sufficient
and Plaintiff's objection is overruled.
* * *
Plaintiff's Interrogatory No. 3 to Defendant
the lawsuits filed by ESP prisoners that have been served
upon you naming you as a defendant.