Boulter v. Greenauer Design Group, Inc.

Filing 42

ORDER granting 37 Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Production of Discovery Requests, as set forth in the Order, by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe on 10/27/2014.(emill)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 14-CV-00204-MSK-MJW
HARVEY BOULTER
(a Dubai, United Arab Emirates, Resident),
PLAINTIFF,
v.
GREENAUER DESIGN GROUP, INC., a Colorado corporation,
DEFENDANT.
_____________________________________________________________________
ORDER REGARDING
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF DISCOVERY REQUESTS
(DOCKET NO. 37)

Entered by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe

This matter is before the court on Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Production of
Discovery Requests (docket no. 37). The court has reviewed the subject motion
(docket no. 37). Defendant did not file any timely response. In addition, the court has
taken judicial notice of the court’s file and has considered applicable Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure and case law. The court now being fully informed makes the following
findings of fact, conclusions of law, and order.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The court finds:
1.

That I have jurisdiction over the subject matter and over the parties
to this lawsuit;

2
2.

That venue is proper in the state and District of Colorado;

3.

That each party has been given a fair and adequate opportunity to
be heard;

4.

That in the subject motion (docket no. 37), Plaintiff seeks an Order
from this court directing Defendant to fully respond to Plaintiff’s
Request for Production of Documents (“RFP”) numbered 1, 3, 5, 6,
7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, and 24
relating to the production of GDG business records, and to compel
answers to Interrogatories (“ROG”) numbered 3, 4, 6, 9, and 10;
and

5.

That Defendant Greenauer Design Group, Inc. (Defendant) has
failed to file any timely response to the subject motion (docket no.
37), and therefore this court deems the subject motion (docket no.
37) confessed. Defendant’s response was due on October 22,
2014, and no response was filed.
ORDER

WHEREFORE, based upon these findings of fact and conclusions of law this
court ORDERS:
1.

That Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Production of Discovery Requests
(docket no. 37) is GRANTED. Defendant shall respond fully to all
of the discovery requests as outlined the subject motion (docket no.
37) on or before November 17, 2014. All discovery exchanged
during this case is subject to the Stipulated Protective Order

3
(docket no. 31); and
2.

That each party shall pay their own attorney fees and costs for this
motion.

Done this 27th day of October 2014.
BY THE COURT

s/Michael J. Watanabe
MICHAEL J. WATANABE
U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE