From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Drain v. Wells Fargo Bank

United States District Court, D. New Mexico
Aug 31, 2005
CIV 04-399 MV/KBM (D.N.M. Aug. 31, 2005)

Opinion

CIV 04-399 MV/KBM.

August 31, 2005


ORDER ON PENDING DISCOVERY MOTIONS


This matter comes on for consideration of several pending discovery motions. Plaintiffs have failed to file a timely response in opposition to the following motions: Defendant Fairbanks' Motion to Compel Response to Its Second Request for Production from James Drain (Doc. 173); the Motion to Compel Responses to Discovery Requests Served on Plaintiffs on May 13, 2005 filed by Defendants Fairbanks and Wells Fargo (Doc. 174); Defendant AHL's Motions to Compel Responses to AHL's Interrogatories and Requests for Production to Rachel Drain (Doc. 176) and to James Drain (178), and Defendant AHL's Motions to Deem Admitted Its Requests for Admission to Rachel Drain (Doc. 177) and to James Drain (179).

Pursuant to our local rules,

[a] motion, response, or reply must include a certificate of service on each party. The failure of a party to file and serve a response in opposition to a motion within the time prescribed for doing so constitutes consent to grant the motion. The failure to file and serve a reply in support of a motion within the time prescribed for doing so constitutes consent that briefing on the motion is complete.

D.N.M.LR-Civ. 7(b). Not only have Plaintiffs thereby consented to the granting of these motions, I further find the motions well taken for the reasons stated in the movant's briefs. I would further incorporate my reasoning set forth in orders granting the same motions that were earlier filed by the co-defendants. See, e.g., Doc. 51.

Two other discovery motions are pending — Plaintiffs' Motion to Quash the Subpoenas (Doc. 150) and Wells Fargo and Fairbanks' Motion for Extension of Pretrial Motions Deadline (Doc. 195) — but no notice of completion has been filed. See D.N.M.LR-Civ. 7.3(b) ("In all cases, upon the completion of briefing, the movant must file and serve on each party a Notice of Completion of Briefing. The Notice of Completion of Briefing must identify by date of filing and docket number the motion which is ready for decision and all briefs or other papers which have been filed relating to that motion."). Because our rules permit the parties to grant extensions of a time to respond, see D.N.M.LR-Civ. 7.6(a), the Court will not rule on such motions in the absence of the movant filing such a notice.

Wherefore,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AS FOLLOWS:

(1) Defendant Fairbanks' Motion to Compel Response to Its Second Request for Production from James Drain (Doc. 173) is granted;

(2) The Motion to Compel Responses to Discovery Requests Served on Plaintiffs on May 13, 2005 filed by Defendants Fairbanks and Wells Fargo (Doc. 174) is granted;

(3) Defendant AHL's Motion to Compel Responses to AHL's Interrogatories and Requests for Production to Rachel Drain (Doc. 176) is granted;

(4) Defendant AHL's Motion to Deem Admitted Its Requests for Admission to Rachel Drain (Doc. 177) is granted;

(5) Defendant AHL's Motion to Compel Responses to AHL's Interrogatories and Requests for Production to James Drain (Doc. 178) is granted; and

(6) Defendant AHL's Motion to Deem Admitted Its Requests for Admission to James Drain (Doc. 179) is granted.


Summaries of

Drain v. Wells Fargo Bank

United States District Court, D. New Mexico
Aug 31, 2005
CIV 04-399 MV/KBM (D.N.M. Aug. 31, 2005)
Case details for

Drain v. Wells Fargo Bank

Case Details

Full title:JAMES AND RACHEL DRAIN Plaintiffs, v. WELLS FARGO BANK, MINNESOTA, NA, et…

Court:United States District Court, D. New Mexico

Date published: Aug 31, 2005

Citations

CIV 04-399 MV/KBM (D.N.M. Aug. 31, 2005)