From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

CMC Steel Fabricators, Inc. v. RK Construction, Inc.

United States District Court, W.D. Louisiana, Monroe Division
Jul 22, 2009
CIVIL ACTION NO. 08-0212 (W.D. La. Jul. 22, 2009)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 08-0212.

July 22, 2009


MEMORANDUM ORDER


Before the court are 1) a motion to compel discovery responses [doc. # 39]; and 2) a motion for telephone scheduling conference [doc. # 40] filed by defendant, Ambling Construction Co., LLC.

As this is not one of the motions excepted in 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A), nor dispositive of any claim on the merits within the meaning of Rule 72 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, this ruling is issued under the authority thereof, and in accordance with the standing order of this court. Any appeal must be made to the district judge in accordance with Rule 72(a) and L.R. 74.1(W).

On, or about May 13, 2009, defendant, Ambling Construction Company, LLC ("Ambling Construction"), served plaintiff, CMC Steel Fabricators, Inc. ("CMC") with interrogatories and a request for production of documents. As of the June 25, 2009, deadline to file motions to compel discovery, CMC had not responded to the discovery requests. Accordingly, Ambling Construction protectively filed the instant motion to compel.

On July 13, 2009, CMC filed its response to the motion to compel stating that it had that day, provided defendants with "the responses and documents which CMC has been able to obtain in response to discovery dated May 13, 2009." (CMC Resp., ¶ 5 [doc. # 50]). CMC's discovery production, however, failed to placate Ambling Construction which maintains that CMC did not produce all documents responsive to the discovery requests. (Ambling Const. Reply Brief [doc. # 59]). Ambling Construction further contends that the documents that CMC did produce were transmitted "in globo," without identifying the request to which the document(s) responded; also, several documents were incomplete. Id. Ambling Construction concludes that CMC should be compelled to produce full and complete responses to the discovery requests and to affirmatively state which requested documents and information do not exist. The court agrees.

Accordingly, Ambling Construction's motion to compel [doc. # 39] is hereby GRANTED and IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff, CMC, shall fully and completely respond to Ambling Construction's Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents within twenty (20) days of the date of this order.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that CMC shall identify the request(s) to which each document is responsive.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that as no prior order compelling responses has been entered against CMC, movant's request for attorney's fees is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Ambling Construction's motion for a telephone scheduling conference [doc. # 40] is hereby DENIED, as moot. ( See July 17, 2009, Scheduling Order extending discovery deadlines, et al. [doc. # 55]).

THUS DONE AND SIGNED at Monroe, Louisiana.


Summaries of

CMC Steel Fabricators, Inc. v. RK Construction, Inc.

United States District Court, W.D. Louisiana, Monroe Division
Jul 22, 2009
CIVIL ACTION NO. 08-0212 (W.D. La. Jul. 22, 2009)
Case details for

CMC Steel Fabricators, Inc. v. RK Construction, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:CMC STEEL FABRICATORS, INC. d/b/a CMC CONSTRUCTION SERVICES v. RK…

Court:United States District Court, W.D. Louisiana, Monroe Division

Date published: Jul 22, 2009

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 08-0212 (W.D. La. Jul. 22, 2009)