3:25-cv-00869•Lewis v. SF Bay Area Rapid Transist District (Bart) et al
Full text
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 United States District Court Northern District of California UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA EUREKA DIVISION GREGORY S. LEWIS, Plaintiff, v. SF BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIST DISTRICT (BART), Defendant. Case No. 25-cv-00869-RS (RMI) ORDER ON MOTION FOR SANCTIONS Re: Dkt. No. 82 Now pending before the court is Plaintiff Gregory Lewis’ Motion for Sanctions and Corrective Relief. Dkt. 82. For the reasons stated below, the motion is DENIED. Plaintiff’s motion is an attempt to relitigate discovery requests already presented to and decided at the August 25, 2026, discovery conference. In the August 25, 2026, Order, the court denied Plaintiff’s request to compel further responses, documents, and admissions. Dkt. 78. Discovery is now closed. The court has already determined that Defendant’s responses were sufficient. Additionally, Plaintiff’s September 3, 2026, case management statement recognizes that the complained-of “supplemental Interrogatory and Request for Admission responses were not required by [the] August 25 order, which denied Plaintiff’s request to compel further responses and admissions.” Dkt. 80 at 2. Accordingly, the motion for sanctions is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: October 9, 2026 ROBERT M. ILLMAN United States Magistrate Judge Case 3:25-cv-00869-RS Document 92 Filed 10/09/26 Page 1 of 1
Wondering how this text applies to your situation?
Free consultation, no commitment
Describe your situation. Our team will contact you by email about your consultation.
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.