Naqvi v. Illinois Health and Science, et al
Filing
78
OPINION entered by U.S. Magistrate Judge Tom Schanzle-Haskins. Defendants' Motion to Compel Plaintiff to Provide Initial Disclosures Under Rule 26(a), Answer Defendants' Interrogatories and Produce Documents Responsive to Defendants' Discovery Requests 72 is ALLOWED in part. See written order. (LB, ilcd)
E-FILED
Wednesday, 10 July, 2019 03:59:27 PM
Clerk, U.S. District Court, ILCD
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS, SPRINGFIELD DIVISION
ALI NAQVI,
Plaintiff,
v.
ILLINOIS HEALTH AND
SCIENCE, et al.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. 17-cv-3145
OPINION
TOM SCHANZLE-HASKINS, U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE:
This matter comes before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Compel
Plaintiff to Provide Initial Disclosures Under Rule 26(a), Answer
Defendants’ Interrogatories and Produce Documents Responsive to
Defendants’ Discovery Requests (d/e 72) (Motion). For the reasons set
forth below, the Motion is ALLOWED in part.
Plaintiff Ali Naqvi failed to serve Rule 26(a) disclosures by August 17,
2018, in accordance with the Scheduling Order (d/e 70). Naqvi also failed
to provide timely responses to Defendants’ interrogatories and requests to
admit. Naqvi’s counsel states that after the filing of the Motion, Naqvi
served his Rule 26(a) disclosures, his answers to some Defendants’
interrogatories, and documents responsive to some Defendants’ requests
Page 1 of 4
to produce. Counsel for Naqvi, however, failed to include sworn
attestations by Naqvi for the answers to interrogatories and responses to
the requests to produce. She asks for leave to produce the remaining
discovery responses and all attestations by July 12, 2019. She says Naqvi
does not raise any objections to the discovery requests. Plaintiff’s
Response to Defendants’ Motion to Compel and Plaintiff’s Request for
Extension of Time to Provide Plaintiff’s Response to the Outstanding
Discovery Requests of the Individual Defendants, (d/e 74) ¶¶ 5-13.
The Court allows the Motion to Compel the outstanding discovery and
attestations. The request to compel Rule 26(a) disclosures is now moot.
The Court gives Naqvi until July 12, 2019 to complete his responses to
outstanding discovery in full, with all objections waived.
The Court denies Defendants’ request for additional time to conduct
depositions because the request is indefinite. Defendants are granted
leave to renew this request with more specificity.
Defendants ask for an award of fees and costs. If a motion to compel
is allowed or if discovery is provided after the motion is filed, the Court
must, after giving an opportunity to be heard, require the party whose
conduct necessitated the motion to pay the movant’s reasonable expenses
incurred in connection with the motion including attorney fees. Fed. R. Civ.
Page 2 of 4
P. 37(a)(5)(A). If the motion is allowed in part and denied in part, the Court
may, after giving opportunity to be heard, apportion the reasonable
expense for the motion. Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(5)(C).
In this case, the Motion is allowed in part because the Court did not
grant Defendants’ request for additional time to conduct depositions
because the request was not sufficiently specific. The Court, however,
granted in full the Defendants’ request to compel Naqvi to provide
responses to outstanding interrogatories and requests to produce, and
Naqvi produced his Rule 26(a) disclosures after the Motion was filed.
Under these circumstances, the Court determines that the Court should
apportion costs to require Naqvi to pay Defendants’ attorney fees and
expenses incurred in bringing this Motion.
THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Compel
Plaintiff to Provide Initial Disclosures Under Rule 26(a), Answer
Defendants’ Interrogatories and Produce Documents Responsive to
Defendants’ Discovery Requests (d/e 72), is ALLOWED in part. Naqvi is
ordered to provide complete responses to Defendants’ outstanding
discovery by July 12, 2019. The request to produce the Rule 26(a)
disclosures is moot. Defendants’ request for additional time to conduct
depositions is denied with leave to refile with more specificity. This Court,
Page 3 of 4
in its discretion, apportions costs under Rule 37(a)(5)(C) and requires
Naqvi to pay Defendants’ attorney fees and expenses incurred in bringing
this Motion. Defendants are directed to file by July 31, 2019, a statement
of fees and expenses incurred in bringing this Motion. Plaintiff Naqvi shall
respond by August 21, 2019, to the Defendants’ statement of fees and
expenses, which response shall contain any matter on which Naqvi wishes
to be heard on the apportionment of fees and expenses. The Court will
then enter an order setting the specific amount of fees and expenses to be
apportioned.
ENTER: July 10, 2019
s/ Tom Schanzle-Haskins
TOM SCHANZLE-HASKINS
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Page 4 of 4
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?