Omaha Steaks International, Inc. v. Pathak

Full title: Omaha Steaks International, Inc., a Nebraska Corporation, Plaintiff, v…

Court: United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, C.D. California

Date published: Dec 17, 2010

CV 03-1401 RSWL (RZx) (C.D. Cal. Dec. 17, 2010)

Opinion

Omaha Steaks International, Inc., a Nebraska Corporation, Plaintiff, v. Anshu Pathak, an individual; Omaha Beef Company, Inc., a California Corporation; Gormet Meat & Seafood inc., a California Corporation; Omaha Beef & Alaska Seafood, Inc., a California corporation; Howie G's Signature Steaks, an entity of unknown origin; Mark Irig, an individual; and Does 1 through 10 inclusive, Defendants. No. CV 03-1401 RSWL (RZx). United States District Court, C.D. California. December 17, 2010.

          ORDER Re: Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Responses of Judgment Debtor Anshu Pathak to Judgment Creditor Omaha Steaks International Inc.'s Post-Judgment Inspection Demands and Interrogatories and for Award of Monetary Sanctions [140, 142]

          RONALD S.W. LEW, Senior District Judge.

         Plaintiff Omaha Steaks International, Inc.'s ("Plaintiff") Motions to Compel Responses of Judgment Debtor Anshu Pathak ("Pathak") to Post-Judgment Inspection Demands and Interrogatories and for Award of Monetary Sanctions was set for hearing on December 1, 2010. Having taken the matter under submission on November 30, 2010, and having reviewed all papers submitted pertaining to these Motions, the Court NOW FINDS AND RULES AS FOLLOWS:

         This Court GRANTS Plaintiff's Motions to Compel Responses to Post-Judgment Inspection Demands and Interrogatories. Pathak has failed to answer without justification Plaintiff's Post-Judgment Inspection Demands and Interrogatories, first served to Pathak on April 7, 2010. Accordingly, Pathak shall provide responses to these Post-Judgment Inspection Demands and Interrogatories to the extent that he has not complied with these requests as of the date of this Order. Pathak has twenty days from the date of this Order to provide these responses to Plaintiff.

         The Court finds that Pathak's failure to answer the Post-Judgment requests was not substantially justified. Moreover, the Court finds that an award of monetary sanctions here against Pathak would not be unjust. However, the Court finds that an award of sanctions in the amount of $975 is appropriate. Pathak is hereby ordered to pay Plaintiff $975 in monetary sanctions.

         IT IS SO ORDERED.