Matthews v. Bergdorf, 15-CV-676-TCK-FHM. (2019)
Court: District Court, N.D. Oklahoma
Number: infdco20190522e04
Visitors: 5
Filed: May 21, 2019
Latest Update: May 21, 2019
Summary: OPINION AND ORDER FRANK H. McCARTHY , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Responses to Requests for Production of Documents, [Dkt. 107], and Plaintiff's Request for Entry of Order, [Dkt. 110], are before the court for decision. No response has been filed to Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Responses to Requests for Production of Documents, [Dkt. 107], and the time to respond has passed. Plaintiffs' Motion to Comp
Summary: OPINION AND ORDER FRANK H. McCARTHY , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Responses to Requests for Production of Documents, [Dkt. 107], and Plaintiff's Request for Entry of Order, [Dkt. 110], are before the court for decision. No response has been filed to Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Responses to Requests for Production of Documents, [Dkt. 107], and the time to respond has passed. Plaintiffs' Motion to Compe..
More
OPINION AND ORDER
FRANK H. McCARTHY, Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Responses to Requests for Production of Documents, [Dkt. 107], and Plaintiff's Request for Entry of Order, [Dkt. 110], are before the court for decision. No response has been filed to Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Responses to Requests for Production of Documents, [Dkt. 107], and the time to respond has passed.
Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Responses to Requests for Production of Documents, [Dkt. 107], and Plaintiff's Request for Entry of Order, [Dkt. 110], are GRANTED.
Defendant Deidre Matthews is hereby ordered to respond to Plaintiff's discovery requests by May 28, 2019. Defendant Deidre Matthews is advised that failure to comply with this Order may result in sanctions including the entry of judgment against her.1
SO ORDERED.
FootNotes
1. It is alleged in the motion that counsel for Defendant Deidre Matthews has not responded to communications from Plaintiff's attorney. If this is true, continued failure to communicate may result in sanctions against counsel.
Source: Leagle
