Nshimba v. Lowe's Home Improvement Warehouse, Inc. et al

Filing 36

ORDER requiring Plaintiff to file his opposition or statement of non-opposition to 23 & 30 Defendant's motions to compel by close of business June 17, 2011. Signed by Judge Nandor J. Vadas on June 15, 2011. (njvlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/15/2011)

1
2
3

NOT FOR CITATION

4
5
6
7

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9

EUREKA DIVISION

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11

No. CV 10-2982 RS (NJV)

LINO NSHIMBA,
12

ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO
FILE OPPOSITION OR STATEMENT OF
NON-OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT’S
MOTION TO COMPEL

Plaintiff,
13
v.
14
15
16

LOWE’S HOME IMPROVEMENT
WAREHOUSE, INC., et al.,
Defendants.

(Docket Nos. 23 & 30)
/

17
18

On May 6, 2011, Defendant Lowe’s Home Improvement Warehouse, Inc. filed a motion to

19

compel Plaintiff Lino Nshimba to respond to Defendant’s First Set of Interrogatories and First

20

Request for Production of Documents, verify his interrogatory responses, and to produce responsive

21

documents. Doc. No. 23. The district court referred Defendant’s motion to compel and all future

22

discovery disputes to this Court for determination. Doc. No. 26. Plaintiff did not file an opposition

23

to Defendant’s motion to compel.

24

On May 19, 2011, the Court ordered counsel for all parties to engage in an in-person meet

25

and confer by June 3, 2011 regarding the pending discovery dispute. On May 24, 2011, Defendant

26

filed a second motion to compel the same responses as its first motion to compel. Doc. No. 30.

27

Defendant indicates that the parties discussed the discovery dispute in detail on May 12, 2011 and

28

that Plaintiff agreed to supplement his responses. Doc. Nos. 30, 31.

1

On June 2, 2011, counsel for Defendant informed the Court that the parties were unable to

2

engage in an in-person meet and confer by June 3, 2011, due in part to the unavailability of

3

Plaintiff’s counsel through June 15, 2011. On June 3, 2011, the Court ordered counsel for all parties

4

to engage in the previously ordered in-person meet and confer regarding the pending discovery

5

dispute by close of business June 20, 2011, and to file a single joint letter regarding the status of the

6

in-person meet and confer by close of business June 23, 2011.

7

On June 14, 2011, Defendant filed a notice of Plaintiff’s non-opposition to its motion to

8

compel. In its notice, Defendant indicates that Plaintiff previously agreed to supplement his

9

responses but has not yet done so. Defendant also indicates that Plaintiff has not responded to its

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11

attempts to meet and confer per this Court’s orders.
To date, Plaintiff has not filed an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to either of

12

Defendant’s motions to compel and his response is long overdue. Plaintiff is ordered to file his

13

opposition or statement of non-opposition to Defendant’s motions to compel by close of business

14

June 17, 2011. The failure to do so will result in the submission of Defendant’s motions to compel

15

on the papers and the June 28, 2011 hearing date will be vacated.

16
17

IT IS SO ORDERED.

18
19
Dated: June 15, 2011
NANDOR J. VADAS
United States Magistrate Judge

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2