Riley v. USA

Filing 34

ORDER by Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland on 1/26/15 GRANTING Motion to Compel Answers to Defendant's Interrogatories, Requests for Production of Documents, and Requests for Admissions 22 . The plaintiff shall respond on or before 2/9/2015. (bsimm, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland
Civil Action No. 14-cv-00878-WJM-BNB
JAMES A. RILEY,
Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant.
______________________________________________________________________________
ORDER
______________________________________________________________________________
This matter arises on the defendant’s Motion to Compel Answers to Defendant’s
Interrogatories, Requests for Production of Documents, and Requests for Admissions [Doc.
# 22, filed 12/9/2014] (the “Motion to Compel”), which is GRANTED.
The defendant served written discovery on the plaintiff on October 23, 2014. Responses
were due on November 25, 2014. No responses were received. Instead, plaintiff’s counsel filed
a Motion to Withdraw [Doc. # 21]. I set the Motion to Withdraw for hearing on January 8, 2015,
and I ordered that the plaintiff be present at the hearing in person. Minute Order [Doc. # 27].
The hearing occurred as scheduled, and the plaintiff appeared as required. Courtroom Minutes
[Doc. # 31]. I granted the Motion to Withdraw. In doing so, I warned the plaintiff that “until
substitute counsel enters its appearance, the plaintiff is personally responsible for complying
with all court orders and time limitations established by applicable statutes and rules. Failure to
meet these obligations may result in the imposition of sanctions, including dismissal of the
action.” Order [Doc. # 32]. At the same time, I ordered the plaintiff to respond to the Motion to

Compel on or before January 22, 2015. Id.
The plaintiff has failed to respond to the Motion to Compel, my order that he do so
notwithstanding.
I have reviewed the discovery served by the defendant. It calls for relevant information
and documents in the possession or control of the plaintiff. An order compelling discovery
is appropriate where, as here, a litigant fails to respond to relevant discovery requests. Fed. R.
Civ. P. 37. Consequently, I will order the plaintiff to respond to the defendant’s written
discovery on or before February 9, 2015. I caution the plaintiff that his failure to comply with
this order and to make the discovery required may result in the imposition of sanctions, including
dismissal of the action. Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(b)(2)(A).
IT IS ORDERED that the plaintiff shall respond to the Defendant’s First Set of
Interrogatories, Requests for Production, and Requests for Admission [Doc. # 22-1] on or before
February 9, 2015.
Dated January 26, 2015.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Boyd N. Boland
United States Magistrate Judge

2