From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rood v. Lockwood

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jun 28, 2022
2:20-cv-0271 KJM AC P (E.D. Cal. Jun. 28, 2022)

Opinion

2:20-cv-0271 KJM AC P

06-28-2022

COLTON JAMES ROOD, Plaintiff, v. ISAAC LOCKWOOD, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

ALLISON CLAIRE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

On March 30, 2022, defendants filed motions to compel plaintiff's responses to interrogatories and requests for production, in which they asserted that plaintiff had completely failed to respond. ECF Nos. 49, 50. Plaintiff opposed the motions on the ground that he mailed out his responses after he received his property back. ECF No. 53. Defendants did not file a reply to the opposition and were ordered to file a notice advising the court whether they had received plaintiff's responses. ECF No. 56. They have now filed a notice stating that the responses were received. ECF No. 57. Since defendants have received plaintiff's responses to their discovery requests, the motions to compel will be denied. Defendants may, if necessary, file motions to compel related to the sufficiency of plaintiff's responses.

The notice states that the responses were received within the timeframe set by the order granting the motions to compel. ECF No. 57. However, the order defendants reference merely ordered plaintiff to respond to the motions. ECF No. 52.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendants' motions to compel (ECF Nos. 49, 50) are DENIED.


Summaries of

Rood v. Lockwood

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jun 28, 2022
2:20-cv-0271 KJM AC P (E.D. Cal. Jun. 28, 2022)
Case details for

Rood v. Lockwood

Case Details

Full title:COLTON JAMES ROOD, Plaintiff, v. ISAAC LOCKWOOD, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Jun 28, 2022

Citations

2:20-cv-0271 KJM AC P (E.D. Cal. Jun. 28, 2022)