Gerald Hodges v. Jason Rhodes, et al.

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA GAINESVILLE DIVISION

GERALD HODGES, Plaintiff,

vs. Case No.: 1:25cv107/MW/ZCB

JASON RHODES, et al., Defendants. ____________________________________/

ORDER

Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action, has filed two motions requesting that his deposition be stayed. (Docs. 66, 67). The two motions will be denied for the same reasons explained in the Court’s prior order (Doc. 69)—namely, that Plaintiff has no constitutional right to appointed counsel and the Court has already authorized Plaintiff to be deposed under Rule 30(a)(2)(B). (See Doc. 69). Plaintiff is once again reminded that he must comply with requested discovery or else he may face sanctions including dismissal. See Amaechi v. Geico, No. 5:20cv442, 2022 WL 4134733, at *4-5 (M.D. Ga. Sept. 12, 2022) (noting that “pro se litigants must conform to procedural rules” and that failing to comply in discovery is grounds for sanctions including dismissal (cleaned up)), aff’d, No. 22-13450, 2024 WL 710546

(11th Cir. Feb. 21, 2024). Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motions (Docs. 66, 67) are DENIED.

DONE AND ORDERED this 5th day of May 2026. /s/ Zachary C. Bolitho Zachary C. Bolitho United States Magistrate Judge