Allen v. Lawrence et al
Filing
67
ORDER granting 64 Motion to Compel. Plaintiff must file, on or before May 27, 2016, his Answers to Defendants' January 18, 2016 Interrogatories and Requests for Production. If he does not timely and properly do so, this case will be dismissed, without prejudice, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 37. Signed by Magistrate Judge J. Thomas Ray on 5/17/2016. (jak)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
JONESBORO DIVISION
STEVEN MARQUELL DESHUN ALLEN
V.
PLAINTIFF
3:15CV00248 BSM/JTR
LAWRENCE, Sergeant,
Craighead County Detention Center, et al.
DEFENDANTS
ORDER
Defendants have filed a Motion asking the Court to compel Plaintiff to answer
their January 18, 2016 Interrogatories and Requests for Production. Doc. 64.
Plaintiff has not responded to the Motion to Compel, and the time for doing so has
expired. See Local Rule 7.2(f) (providing 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 the Motion because
Plaintiff's blanket and unspecified "objection" to all twenty-four Interrogatories and
seven requests for Production of Documents was improper. See Local Rule 33.1
(clarifying that a "blanket objection" to discovery requests "will not be recognized,"
and that, instead, objections "must be stated with particularity" to each separate
-1-
discovery request).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT Defendants' Motion to Compel (Doc.
64) is GRANTED. Plaintiff must file, on or before May 27, 2016, his Answers to
Defendants' January 18, 2016 Interrogatories and Requests for Production. If he does
not timely and properly do so, this case will be dismissed, without prejudice, pursuant
to Fed. R. Civ. P. 37.
Dated this 17th day of May, 2016.
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
-2-
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?