Shepard v. Quillen

Filing 57

ORDER DENYING Plaintiff's 53 Motion to Compel, signed by Magistrate Judge Sandra M. Snyder on 10/3/2011. (Marrujo, C)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9

LAMONT SHEPARD,

10

CASE NO. 1:09-cv-00809-LJO-SMS PC

Plaintiff,

11

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO
COMPEL

v.
(ECF. No.53, 55)

12

T. QUILLEN, et al.,

13

Defendants.
/

14
15

Discovery in this action opened on March 31, 2011. On June 9, 2011, Plaintiff filed a motion

16

to compel Defendant Quillen to respond to interrogatories. (ECF No. 53.) Plaintiff brings this

17

motion on the ground that he served the interrogatories on April 6, 2011, and has not received a

18

response. Defendant Quillen filed an opposition to the motion on June 27, 2011. (ECF No. 55.)

19

Defendant Quillen states that timely responses were served on May 20, 2011. In support of the

20

motion Defendant includes a proof of service, declaring under penalty of perjury, that Defendant

21

Quillen’s responses to Plaintiff’s interrogatories were mailed to Plaintiff on May 20, 2011.

22

Defendant Quillen’s responses were mailed within the forty five days required by the

23

discovery and scheduling order, issued March 31, 2011, and were timely served. Accordingly,

24

Plaintiff’s motion to compel discovery is HEREBY DENIED as moot.

25
26
27
28

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

October 3, 2011

/s/ Sandra M. Snyder
1

1

icido3

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2