Opinion
2:21-cv-00045-CDS-NJK
08-26-2022
STEVEN ERIC GOULD, Plaintiffs, v. TRINITY SERVICES GROUP, INC., et al., Defendant.
[Docket No. 63]
ORDER
NANCY J. KOPPE, MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Pending before the Court is Defendants' motion to compel. Docket No. 63. No response was filed. See Docket. This matter is properly resolved without a hearing. See Local Rule 78-1.
Defendants submit that they served then first set of interrogatories on Plaintiff on May 20, 2022. Docket No. 63 at 2. Defendants submit that Plaintiffs responses are inadequate. Id. at 2-4. Defendants ask the Court to require Plaintiff to supplement his responses. Id. at 6-7.
Plaintiff failed to respond to Defendants' motion and the time to do so has now passed. See Docket. “The failure of an opposing party to file points and authorities in response to any motion . . . constitutes a consent to the granting of the motion.” Local Rule 7-2(d). Plaintiff has therefore consented to the granting of Defendants' motion. In addition, the Court has reviewed Defendants' motion and finds it meritorious.
Accordingly, Defendants' motion to compel. Docket No. 63, is hereby GRANTED. Plaintiff is ORDERED to provide appropriate responses to Defendants' first set of interrogatories, no later than September 26, 2022.
IT IS SO ORDERED.