Opinion
23-10797
08-21-2024
WESTLAKE ROYAL BUILDING PRODUCTS INC., Plaintiff, v. INNOVATOOLS INC., Defendant.
Honorable Gershwin A. Drain Judge
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO COMPEL INSPECTION (ECF NO. 48)
ELIZABETH A. STAFFORD UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
InnovaTools Inc. moves to compel Westlake Royal Building Products Inc. to permit inspection of equipment by InnovaTools' attorney and technical expert. ECF No. 48. InnovaTools first served its requests for an inspection under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 34 on July 15, 2024, and served an amended notice on July 17, 2024. Id., PageID.997-998. InnovaTools sought to have the inspection before the July 31, 2024 close of discovery. Id.; ECF No. 18, PageID.212.
InnovaTools served its request for an inspection too late. “Absent express permission from the court, parties should assume that the discovery deadline is the end of discovery.” Boone v. Stieve, 642 F.Supp.3d 597, 603 (E.D. Mich. 2022). And a party has 30 days to respond to requests for inspection unless a stipulation or order states otherwise. Rule 34(b)(2)(A). So for InnovaTools' request for inspection to be timely, it had to serve the request 30 days before the July 31 discovery deadline. Boone, 642 F.Supp. At 603 (“Generally, the discovery deadline specifies the date on which all discovery must be completed, therefore, any document requests must be served at least 30 days prior to the discovery deadline.” (cleaned up)); Arnott v. Ashland Hospital Corp., No. 0:15-cv-0032, 2016 WL 7974071, at *2 (E. D. Ky. April 4, 2016) (“[A] party must serve his discovery requests at least thirty days before the court-ordered discovery deadline to be timely and to necessitate a response.”).
InnovaTools' request for inspection was served too late, so the Court DENIES its motion to compel.