Johnson v. Boyd et al

Filing 52

ORDER granting 47 Defendants' Motion to Compel. Plaintiff shall FILE, within 15 days of the entry of this Order, his Response to Interrogatory 6 and the Medical Authorizations attached to Defendants' Second Request for Production. Plaintiff is advised that the failure to timely & properly do so will result in this case being dismissed, without prejudice. Signed by Magistrate Judge J. Thomas Ray on 12/3/08. (jct)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS JONESBORO DIVISION

JONATHAN B. JOHNSON ADC #140542 V. 3:08CV00084 SWW/JTR

PLAINTIFF

LARRY ZANE BOYD, Administrator, Crittenden County Detention Center, et al. ORDE R

DEFENDANTS

On November 7, 2008, Defendants in this pro se § 1983 action filed a Motion to Compel and a Brief in Support (docket entries #47 and #48) asking the Court to require Plaintiff to: (1) complete the Medical Authorizations attached to their August 25, 2008 Second Request for Production; and (2) answer Interrogatory #6, which asks Plaintiff to "state what each named Defendant did wrong with respect to each and every allegation you have presented in your complaint." See docket entry #47, Ex. C. Plaintiff has not responded to Defendants' Motion to Compel, and the time for doing so has expired. See Local Rule 7.2(b) (providing that: "Within eleven days from the date copies of a motion and supporting papers have been served upon him, any party opposing a motion shall serve and file with the Clerk a concise statement in opposition to the motion with supporting authorities"); Local Rule 7.2(f) (stating that the "failure to timely respond to any nondispositive motion . . . shall be an adequate basis, without more, for granting the relief sought in said motion"). Additionally, the Court finds good cause for granting Defendants' Motion. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT:

1. 2.

Defendants' Motion to Compel (docket entry #47) is GRANTED. Plaintiff shall FILE, with fifteen days of the entry of this Order, his Response to

Interrogatory #6 and the Medical Authorizations attached to Defendants' Second Request for Production.1 3. Plaintiff is advised that the failure to timely and properly do so will result in this case

being dismissed, without prejudice, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(b)(2)(A)(v).2 Dated this 3rd day of December, 2008.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Usually, discovery responses are not filed with the Court and, instead, are mailed directly to the opposing counsel, along with a certificate of service. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(d). However, the Court hereby instructs Plaintiff to FILE those specific discovery responses WITH THE CLERK so that it can determine whether Plaintiff has timely and properly complied with this Order. Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(b)(2) provides, in pertinent part, that a court may dismiss an action if "a party fails to obey an order ro provide or permit discovery."
2

1