From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gaede v. Podrebarac

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA SOUTHWESTERN DIVISION
Aug 24, 2011
Case No. 1:10-cv-070 (D.N.D. Aug. 24, 2011)

Opinion

Case No. 1:10-cv-070

08-24-2011

Dennis James Gaede, Plaintiff, v. James To Podrebarac, Leann Bersch, Warren Emmer, Tim Schuetzle, and Kathy Bachmeier, Defendants.


ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S

MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY

WITHOUT PREJUDICE

On July 27, 2011, plaintiff filed a Motion for Discovery. He seeks an order from the court compelling defendants to respond to interrogatories and production requests that are attached to his motion.

On August 3, 2011, defendants filed a response to plaintiff's motion. They advise the court that they were not previously served with plaintiff's discovery requests. They further indicated that they intend to respond to plaintiff‘s discovery requests in accordance with the applicable procedural rules.

Consequently, plaintiff’s motion to compel appears to be premature. Defendants only recently received plaintiffs' discovery requests and have indicated that they are in the process of formulating their responses. Accordingly, plaintiff‘s motion (Docket No. 21) is DENIED without prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Charles S. Miller, Jr., Magistrate Judge

United States District Court


Summaries of

Gaede v. Podrebarac

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA SOUTHWESTERN DIVISION
Aug 24, 2011
Case No. 1:10-cv-070 (D.N.D. Aug. 24, 2011)
Case details for

Gaede v. Podrebarac

Case Details

Full title:Dennis James Gaede, Plaintiff, v. James To Podrebarac, Leann Bersch…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA SOUTHWESTERN DIVISION

Date published: Aug 24, 2011

Citations

Case No. 1:10-cv-070 (D.N.D. Aug. 24, 2011)