Peets v. Townsend

Full title: LOUIS PEETS, Plaintiff, v. RICHARD TOWNSEND, Defendant.

Court: United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Jan 9, 2023

2:18-CV-2469-KJM-DMC-P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 9, 2023)

Opinion

2:18-CV-2469-KJM-DMC-P

01-09-2023

LOUIS PEETS, Plaintiff, v. RICHARD TOWNSEND, Defendant.

DENNIS M. COTA, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

ORDER

DENNIS M. COTA, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the Court is Defendant's unopposed motion, ECF No. 83, to compel Plaintiff to provide responses to written discovery.¹

1 Defendant has also filed a separate motion to compel related to Plaintiff's deposition. See ECF No. 85. That motion was filed on January 5, 2023. Plaintiff's opposition is due in February 2023.

Defendant served on Plaintiff interrogatories and requests for production of documents on August 15, 2022. See id. at 3. Plaintiff has failed to serve responses to Defendant's discovery requests. See id. at 4. Defendant seeks an order compelling Plaintiff to serve responses and pay reasonable expenses in the amount of $1,540.00 for seven hours of attorney time at a rate of $220.00 per hour. Pursuant to Eastern District of California Local Rule 230(c), (1), the Court construes Plaintiff's failure to file an opposition Defendant's motion as consent to the relief requested. The Court also finds good cause for the relief requested in light of 1 Plaintiff's failure to serve discovery responses and the requirement under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(a)(5)(A) that the Court award reasonable expenses.

As to expenses, the Court further finds that that the amount requested is not reasonable. Defense counsel states seven hours were expended preparing the current motion to compel. Given the nature of the dispute, specifically the total failure to respond to discovery, and the brevity of the papers filed in connection with the motion, the Court finds that three hours is reasonable.

Finally, Plaintiff is cautioned that failure to comply with this order may result in terminating sanctions upon proper motion by Defendant.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Defendant's unopposed motion to compel, ECF No. 83, is granted;

2. Plaintiff shall serve responses to Defendant's interrogatories and requests for production, served on August 15, 2022, within 30 days of the date of this order;

3. Within 30 days of the date of this Order, Plaintiff shall pay to Defendant the amount of $660.00 as reasonable expenses; and

4. Pending further order of the Court, the dispositive motion filing deadline is vacated. 2