Opinion
Civil Action No. 07-cv-00333-WDM-BNB.
August 5, 2008
ORDER
This matter is before me on the defendant's Motion to Compel Plaintiff to Provide Supplemental Discovery Responses [Doc. # 71, filed 7/2/2008] (the "Motion to Compel Supplement"). I held a hearing on the motion this morning and made rulings on the record, which are incorporated here. In summary and for the reasons stated on the record:
IT IS ORDERED that the Motion to Compel Supplement is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows:
GRANTED to require the plaintiff to provide supplemental responses to Interrogatories 3 and 4 and to Production Request Nos. 7, 8, and 11, in full compliance with the formalities of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, including Rule 33(b)(3) and (5) which require that interrogatories be answered "in writing under oath" by the person making the answer, on or before September 1, 2008; and
DENIED in all other respects. In particular, I find that the circumstances make it unjust to award the costs and attorney fees incurred by either side in connection with the Motion to Compel Supplement.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that in view of the stipulation of the parties at Part 4(1) of the Final Pretrial Order [Doc. # 64, filed 6/5/2008] that "Mr. Barefield's alleged loss wage claim ends on November 10, 2005," there is no need for further supplementation after September 1, 2008, by the plaintiff to defendant's Interrogatories 3, 4, and 12, and Production Request Nos. 7, 8, and 11, because the information sought by those requests is neither relevant to nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence concerning any matter at issue in the case.