Filed: Sep. 09, 2014
Latest Update: Sep. 09, 2014
Summary: ORDER FRANK D. WHITNEY, Chief District Judge. THIS MATTER is before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Production of Documents, (Doc. No. 23), Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Discovery, (Doc. No. 24), Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions, (Doc. No. 29), and Defendants' motion for Extension of Time to Deem Response Timely Filed, (Doc. No. 31). The Court notes that on March 19, 2014, Plaintiff filed both the pending Motion to Compel Production of Documents, (Doc. No. 23), and Motion to Compel D
Summary: ORDER FRANK D. WHITNEY, Chief District Judge. THIS MATTER is before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Production of Documents, (Doc. No. 23), Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Discovery, (Doc. No. 24), Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions, (Doc. No. 29), and Defendants' motion for Extension of Time to Deem Response Timely Filed, (Doc. No. 31). The Court notes that on March 19, 2014, Plaintiff filed both the pending Motion to Compel Production of Documents, (Doc. No. 23), and Motion to Compel Di..
More
ORDER
FRANK D. WHITNEY, Chief District Judge.
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Production of Documents, (Doc. No. 23), Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Discovery, (Doc. No. 24), Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions, (Doc. No. 29), and Defendants' motion for Extension of Time to Deem Response Timely Filed, (Doc. No. 31). The Court notes that on March 19, 2014, Plaintiff filed both the pending Motion to Compel Production of Documents, (Doc. No. 23), and Motion to Compel Discovery, (Doc. No. 24). On May 1, 2014, Defendants filed an untimely response to these two motions, stating that Defendants had responded to the discovery requests without objection. (Doc. No. 30). However, on May 8, 2014, Plaintiff filed an additional motion to compel, stating that Defendants has not responded to his discovery requests. On June 28, 2014, Defendants filed a motion for extension of time to address discovery issues. In the motion for extension of time, counsel explained that because of the heavy caseload in counsel's position with the North Carolina Attorney General's office, answers in discovery has been delayed in numerous cases, including Plaintiff's.1 On June 30, 2014, this Court granted Defendants an additional sixty days to respond fully to Plaintiff's discovery requests.
The Court will at this time deny the motions to compel and for discovery filed by Plaintiff on March 19, 2014. The Court will also deny the motion for sanctions filed by Plaintiff on April 29, 2014. The Court will, however, reserve ruling on the motion to compel filed by Plaintiff on May 8, 2014, pending resolution of the pending discovery matters. The Court will address this latest motion to compel by Plaintiff when the Court receives further notice from Defendants regarding any outstanding discovery issues.
IT IS, THEREFORE ORDERED that
(1) Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Production of Documents, (Doc. No. 23), Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Discovery, (Doc. No. 24), and Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions, (Doc. No. 29), are DENIED.
(2) Defendants' Motion for Extension of Time to File Response, (Doc. No. 31), is GRANTED nunc pro tunc.
(3) Within ten (10) days of this Order, Defendants shall notify the Court of the status of the pending discovery requests from Plaintiff to Defendants in this action.
