Lipsey v. Reddy et al

Filing 69

ORDER DENYING Plaintiff's 67 Motion in Opposition to Defendants' Interrogatories, Set One, as Unnecessary, signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 9/26/18. (Marrujo, C)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9

CHRISTOPHER LIPSEY, JR.,

10
11
12

Plaintiff,
vs.
DR. REDDY, et al.,

13

Defendants.

14
15

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 1:17-cv-00569-LJO-BAM (PC)
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’
INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE, AS
UNNECESSARY
(Doc. No. 67)

Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion in opposition to Defendants’

16

Interrogatories, Set One, filed on September 10, 2018. (Doc. No. 67.) Plaintiff seeks a

17

protective order and sanctions, arguing that the interrogatories are improper and untimely.

18

Defendants filed a response on September 25, 2018, agreeing that the interrogatories are

19

untimely. (Doc. No. 68.) In support, defense counsel declares that counsel misunderstood the

20

Court’s order staying non-exhaustion related discovery, and withdraws the interrogatories.

21

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion is HEREBY DENIED, as unnecessary. Plaintiff is not

22

required to respond to Defendants Interrogatories, Set One, served on August 10, 2018.

23

Sanctions are not appropriate, as the mistake was a reasonable misinterpretation, not bad faith.

24
25
26
27
28

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

September 26, 2018

/s/ Barbara

A. McAuliffe

_

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE