How have the courts treated a motion to compel a pro se plaintiff to produce evidence in discovery?

by that date. Id. at 4. Plaintiff submitted his motion to compel on August 17, 2017.¹ ECF No. 25 at 7. Discovery was closed months earlier and plaintiff has not offered a reason to excuse his failure to comply with the court's scheduling order nor presented good cause for modification of that order. Thus, his motion to compel is denied. See United States v. Merrill, 746 F.2d 458, 465 (9th Cir.1984) (holding that pro se litigants are subject to the same rules of procedure and evidence as those that are represented by counsel).