Hopson v. La Contenta Plaza, A California Limited Partnership et al

Filing 34

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 11/16/15 ORDERING that Defendant's October 6, 2015 motion to compel and award sanctions (Dkt. No. 25 ) is granted; Plaintiff shall produce responses to the discovery at issue within 21 days of the date of this order; and Plaintiff shall pay sanctions to defendant in connection with the bringing of the motion in the amount of $840 within thirty days of the date of this order. (cc Financial) (Becknal, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

CYNTHIA HOPSON,

12
13
14
15
16
17
18

No. 2:14-cv-2988 GEB KJN (TEMP)

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

LA CONTENTA PLAZA, a California
Limited Partnership; MARK TWAIN ST.
JOSEPH’S HEALTHCARE
CORPORATION, dba Family Medical
Center Valley Springs; GERALD WALK,
dba Pizza Factory; CAROL WALK, dba
Pizza Factory; and DOES 1-10, inclusive,
Defendants.

19
20

On October 6, 2015, defendant La Contenta Plaza, a California Limited Partnership, filed

21

a motion to compel and request for sanctions in the amount of $990, in light of plaintiff’s failure

22

to respond to discovery requests. (Dkt. No. 25.) That motion was noticed for hearing on October

23

30, 2015, before the previously assigned Magistrate Judge.

24

On October 16, 2015, plaintiff filed a statement of non-opposition to defendant’s motion,

25

except that plaintiff requested that the sanction amount be reduced to $840, in light of the fact that

26

defendant’s request for $990 was premised on defense counsel’s time spent attending the hearing

27

on the motion to compel. (Dkt. No. 29.) In this regard, plaintiff argues that “such hearing is

28

superfluous since Plaintiff is not opposing the motion.” (Id. at 2.)
1

On October 21, 2015, the hearing of defendant’s motion was vacated, (Dkt. No. 31), and

1
2

on November 6, 2015, this matter was temporarily assigned to the undersigned. (Dkt. No. 33.) In

3

light of plaintiff’s non-opposition, defendant’s motion to compel and request for sanctions will be

4

granted.1

5
6

Accordingly, upon consideration of the arguments on file, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED
that:
1. Defendant’s October 6, 2015 motion to compel and award sanctions (Dkt. No. 25) is

7
8

granted;

9
10

2. Plaintiff shall produce responses to the discovery at issue within 21 days of the date of
this order; and

11

3. Plaintiff shall pay sanctions to defendant in connection with the bringing of the motion

12

in the amount of $840 within thirty days of the date of this order.

13

Dated: November 16, 2015

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
hopson2988.mtc.grt.docx

27
28

1

Counsel for defendant has informed the court that defendant does not oppose plaintiff’s request
for sanctions in the amount of $840.
2