KLAYMAN v. OBAMA et al

Filing 103

MOTION to Compel Defendants' Compliance With FRCP Rule 26 by LARRY E. KLAYMAN, MARY ANN STRANGE (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Klayman, Larry)

IN UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
LARRY KLAYMAN, et. al.,
Plaintiffs,

v.

BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA II, et. al.

Civil Action No.: 13-cv-851

Defendants.
Judge Richard J. Leon

PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO COMPEL DEFENDANTS'
COMPLIANCE WITH FRCP RULE 26
Plaintiffs, Larry Klayman, Charles Strange, Mary Ann Strange, Matt Garrison, and
Michael Ferrari, respectfully request that this Court issue an order compelling Defendants to
comply with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure ("FRCP") Rule 26 and as grounds thererfor would
show:
Under FRCP Rule 26:
(f) Conference of the Parties; Planning for Discovery.
(1) Conference Timing. Except in a proceeding exempted from initial disclosure
under Rule 26(a)(1)(B) or when the court orders otherwise, the parties must
confer as soon as practicable—and in any event at least 21 days before a
scheduling conference is to be held or a scheduling order is due under Rule 16(b).

In this Court's respective Standing Orders, the Court has ordered the Rule 26 conference
to take place “within 30 days of all defendants answering the complaint or filing other motions

1

under Rule 12(b).” See No. 13-851, ECF No. 6 at 2; see also No. 13-881, ECF No. 4 at 4
(same).
The Government Defendants are again simply stalling, and engaging in delay tactics
since the onset of this lawsuit. For instance, they have falsely asserted that the individual
Government Defendants have not been served, requiring Plaintiffs to file their Motion For Entry
Of Default And To Strike Government Defendants Answer To Plaintiffs Third Amended
Complaint (ECF No. 85). 1
The Government Defendants are simply stalling, attempting to avoid even the start of
discovery. It has therefore become clear that a motion to compel is the only way in which the
Defendants will attend a Rule 26 conference or serve initial disclosures upon Plaintiffs.
Defendants have refused to consent to a Rule 26 conference and Plaintiffs informed
Defendant's counsel that they intended to move to compel compliance with Rule 26. See email
from Obama Justice Department attached as Exhibit 1.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court issue an order compelling
the Government Defendants and their counsel to comply with FRCP Rule 26.

Dated: April 1, 2014
Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Larry Klayman
Larry Klayman, Esq.
General Counsel
Freedom Watch, Inc.
D.C. Bar No. 334581
2020 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Suite 345
1

Service for Klayman III (No. 14-cv-92) has been sent out and Plaintiffs are awaiting returns of
service from their U.S.P.S. Certified Mail. It is apparent that Defendants are engaging in more
delay tactics.
2

Washington, DC 20006
Tel: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Attorney for Plaintiffs and the Class

3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 1st day of April, 2014, a true and correct copy of the
foregoing Motion to Compel Compliance with Rule 26 (Civil Action No. 13-cv-851) was
submitted electronically to the District Court for the District of Columbia and served via
CM/ECF upon the following:

James J. Gilligan
Special Litigation Counsel
Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch
U.S. Department of Justice
P.O. Box 883
Washington, D.C. 20044
[phone]
Email: [e-mail]

Attorneys for Defendants.

Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Larry Klayman
Larry Klayman, Esq.
General Counsel
Freedom Watch, Inc.
D.C. Bar No. 334581
2020 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Suite 345
Washington, DC 20006
Tel: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

4