Opinion
Case No. 2:08-cv-00863-RCJ-GWF
02-20-2013
RICHARD CHUDACOFF, Plaintiff, v. UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff's Renewed Motion for Sanctions (#630), filed on February 15, 2013; Plaintiff's Counsel Jacob Hafter's Letter to the Court (#628), filed on February 15, 2013; UMC Defendants' Counsel Sean Kelly's Letter to the Court (#636), filed on February 19, 2013; and MEC Defendants' Counsel Peter Angulo's Letter to the Court (#638), filed on February 19, 2013.
Plaintiff initially filed his Renewed Motion for Sanctions on February 8, 2013. See Doc. #620. In accordance with the Court's Order (#615), however, the Court struck the Motion and ordered Plaintiff to meet and confer with Defendants. See Doc. #625. Plaintiff filed a Letter (#628) with the Court representing that he unsuccessfully attempted to meet and confer with Defendants regarding the disputed discovery. The Court subsequently ordered Plaintiff to re-file his Motion for Sanctions. See February 15, 2013 Minute Order, Doc #629. Plaintiff re-filed the Motion on February 15, 2013. Mr. Kelly then filed a Letter (#636) stating that the meet-and-confer period was too brief, and that UMC's Counsel is unable to attend the February 27 hearing the Court set for the instant Motion (#630) in its February 15 Minute Order (#629). Mr. Kelly represented UMC's Counsel would not be available until April. Mr. Angulo filed a separate Letter (#638) stating that the MEC Defendants are not involved in the current discovery dispute.
The Court is not inclined to delay ruling on Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions (#630) until April. Therefore, the Court will vacate the February 27 hearing on the Motion, and will decide the matter on the pleading papers submitted in the ordinary course set forth in the Local Rules. In rendering its decision, the Court will take into consideration the brevity of the allotted meet-and-confer period. In the event the Parties are able to agree on a hearing date within 7 days after the briefing schedule concludes, they may submit an appropriate stipulation. The Court instructs the Parties to exercise caution before filing any further motions or letters regarding this matter. Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the February 27, 2013 hearing on Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions (#630) is vacated. The Court shall decide the Motion on the pleading papers.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants' response to Plaintiff's Motion (#630) is due no later than March 4, 2013. Plaintiff's reply is due no later than March 14, 2013.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that in the event the Parties desire a hearing on the Motion (#630), they may submit a stipulation no later than March 7, 2013 agreeing on a hearing date no later than March 21, 2013.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that in light of the Court's Order (#627) granting Defendant's Motion for Protective Order (#609), the February 27, 2013 hearing regarding the Motion (#609) is vacated.
________
GEORGE FOLEY, JR.
United States Magistrate Judge