Jackson v. Khoury

Full title: RAYMOND D. JACKSON, Plaintiff, v. NADIM K. KHOURY, et al., Defendants

Court: United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: Jan 14, 2008

No. CIV S-06-1893 LKK DAD P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 14, 2008)

Opinion

No. CIV S-06-1893 LKK DAD P.

January 14, 2008

ORDER

DALE DROZD, Magistrate Judge

Defendants have filed a motion to compel plaintiff to respond to three sets of requests for interrogatories without objection. Defendants offer evidence that their requests were served on plaintiff on August 23, 2007, and that plaintiff failed to respond in any way. Plaintiff has not filed opposition or a statement of non-opposition to defendants' motion.

Plaintiff is in violation of multiple court orders and rules. First, plaintiff failed to respond to defendants' motion. Pursuant to the order filed in this action on April 3, 2007, all motions concerning discovery shall be briefed by the parties pursuant to Local Rule 78-230(m). (Order filed Apr. 3, 2007 at 3.) The same order cautions that failure to oppose a motion timely may be deemed a waiver of opposition to the motion. (Id. at 3.) Second, the discovery order filed in this action on June 18, 2007, provides that responses to written discovery requests shall be served on the requesting party no later than forty-five days after the request was first served. (Order filed June 18, 2007, at 1.) The order further provides that, "[i]f disputes arise about the parties' obligations to respond to requests for discovery, the parties shall comply with all pertinent rules," including the briefing requirements of Local Rule 78-230(m). (Id. at 2.) Plaintiff did not serve responses to defendants' discovery requests within forty-five days, did not seek an extension of time to respond to defendants' requests, and did not respond to defendants' motion to compel. For these reasons, the court will grant defendants' motion to compel discovery pursuant to Rule 37(a)(2)(B) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and require plaintiff to serve responses without objections.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Defendants' October 26, 2007 motion to compel is granted;

2. Plaintiff shall respond to Defendant Khoury's First Request for Responses to Interrogatories, Defendant Andreasen's First Request for Responses to Interrogatories, and Defendant Schwartz's First Request for Responses to Interrogatories without objections; and

3. Plaintiff's responses shall be served on defendants' counsel within twenty days from the date of this order and shall also be filed with the court with proof of service on defendants' counsel.