Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Hassan v. Credco, 2:13-cv-1942-KJM-KJN. (2015)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20150224962 Visitors: 8
Filed: Feb. 23, 2015
Latest Update: Feb. 23, 2015
Summary: ORDER AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE KENDALL J. NEWMAN, Magistrate Judge. Presently pending before the court is defendant Experian Information Solutions, Inc.'s ("Experian") motion to compel plaintiff's responses to Experian's interrogatories and requests for production of documents, presently set for hearing on February 26, 2015. (ECF No. 73.) 1 According to Experian, plaintiff failed to respond to Experian's counsel's attempts to meet and confer concerning the outstanding discovery responses. In l
More

ORDER AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

KENDALL J. NEWMAN, Magistrate Judge.

Presently pending before the court is defendant Experian Information Solutions, Inc.'s ("Experian") motion to compel plaintiff's responses to Experian's interrogatories and requests for production of documents, presently set for hearing on February 26, 2015. (ECF No. 73.)1 According to Experian, plaintiff failed to respond to Experian's counsel's attempts to meet and confer concerning the outstanding discovery responses. In light of plaintiff's complete failure to respond to Experian's discovery requests, the motion was noticed for hearing on fourteen (14) days' notice in accordance with Local Rule 251(e), requiring any response to the motion to be filed not later than seven (7) days before the hearing date. The court's records indicate that plaintiff failed to file a response to Experian's motion in accordance with Local Rule 251(e).

Furthermore, the court notes that another defendant, Corelogic Credco, LLC ("Corelogic"), has also filed various motions to compel plaintiff's responses to its interrogatories and requests for production of documents, as well as a motion to compel plaintiff to provide initial disclosures in accordance with the district judge's prior scheduling order. (ECF Nos. 74, 75, 76, 77.) Those motions to compel are presently set for hearing on March 26, 2015.

The completion deadline for fact discovery in this matter is March 27, 2015. (See ECF No. 67.) In light of plaintiff's purported discovery conduct thus far, plaintiff's failure to respond to Experian's motion in accordance with the Local Rules, and the imminently approaching fact discovery completion deadline, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The February 26, 2015 hearing on Experian's motion to compel is VACATED and CONTINUED to Thursday March 5, 2015, at 10:00 a.m., in Courtroom No. 25 before the undersigned. 2. The March 26, 2015 hearing on Corelogic's motions to compel is VACATED and ADVANCED to Thursday March 5, 2015, at 10:00 a.m., in Courtroom No. 25 before the undersigned. 3. Plaintiff shall file any response to the pending motions to compel no later than Monday March 2, 2015, at 5:00 p.m. Defendants may, but need not, file a reply to any response no later than Wednesday March 4, 2015, at 12:00 p.m. 4. Plaintiff shall also SHOW CAUSE, in writing, why the action should not be dismissed based on plaintiff's purported discovery conduct and failure to prosecute the case. Plaintiff's response to the order to show cause shall be filed no later than Monday March 2, 2015, at 5:00 p.m. 5. Plaintiff shall appear in person at the March 5, 2015 hearing, and shall not be permitted to appear telephonically. 6. Failure to strictly comply with the terms and deadlines of this order may result in the imposition of sanctions, including a recommendation of dismissal of the action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

FootNotes


1. Although plaintiff represents himself in this action, plaintiff is a licensed attorney in active status with the California Bar. As such, this action has not been designated as a pro se action.
Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer