ORDER

BRIAN K. EPPS, Magistrate Judge.

Upon request by Plaintiffs' counsel, the Court conducted a phone conference to discuss the status of discovery on June 21, 2016. During the conference, counsel for both parties agreed to the following facts and time line of events. In February 2016, Defendants served Plaintiffs with their first request for admissions, first request for production, and first interrogatories in the two captioned civil actions. After a consent extension of the response deadline to April 4, 2016, and a second consent extension to April 25, 2016, Defendants produced documents on April 25, 2016, and responded to the request for admissions. Defendants failed to serve responses to the interrogatories and document requests. The document production was not bates-stamped.

As of today, Defendants have still not served these discovery responses despite repeated reminders and entreaties from Plaintiffs. Citing excuses that include his busy law practice, the complexity of the case, and an illness of Defendant Daniel Cook, defense counsel promised he would serve all outstanding discovery responses and a supplemental production by this Friday, June 24, 2016. The Court ORDERS Defendants to do so and cautions defense counsel that, as explained during the conference, discovery deadlines are to be taken seriously and not brushed aside. A similar pattern of conduct by defense counsel occurred recently in CV 315-072. Additional abuses of the discovery process by defense counsel in any civil action will serve as cause for consideration of sanctions.

SO ORDERED.