Thompson v. Press-Seal Gasket Corporation
Filing
32
OPINION AND ORDER granting 21 Motion to Compel. Thompson shall answer Press-Seals First Set of Interrogatories (DE 31-1) and respond to Press- Seals First Request for Production of Documents (DE 31-2) on or before 11/19/2015. Signed by Magistrate Judge Susan L Collins on 11/5/15. (mc) Modified to show cc: Robert Vance Jr on 11/5/2015 (mc).
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
FORT WAYNE DIVISION
DORIS M. THOMPSON,
Plaintiff,
v.
PRESS-SEAL GASKET CORPORATION,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CAUSE NO. 1:15-cv-00049-JVB-SLC
OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court is a Motion to Compel filed on October 14, 2015, by Defendant Press-Seal
Gasket Corporation (“Press-Seal”), seeking to compel Plaintiff Doris M. Thompson to respond to its
outstanding written discovery requests. (DE 21). Thompson has not filed a response to the motion,
and the time to do so has now expired. For the following reasons, Press-Seal’s motion to compel
will be GRANTED.
A. Procedural Background
Thompson filed this employment discrimination suit against Press-Seal on October 6, 2014,
in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. (DE 1). Press-Seal filed a motion to change venue (DE 5),
which was granted (DE 7), and the case was transferred to this Court on February 17, 2015 (DE 2).
This Court conducted a scheduling conference on March 24, 2015, setting a discovery
deadline of October 26, 2015. (DE 19). On July 8, 2015, Press-Seal served interrogatories and
requests for production on Thompson. (DE 21 ¶ 2; DE 31). After Thompson failed to respond in 30
days, Press-Seal on September 23, 2015, emailed Thompson’s counsel, advising him that the
discovery responses were nearly 45 days overdue and that Press-Seal needed the discovery as soon
as possible because of the quickly-approaching discovery deadline. (DE 21 ¶¶ 3, 4; DE 21-1 at 2).
After Thompson’s counsel did not respond, Press-Seal emailed him again on October 8, 2015,
informing him that it would file a motion to compel if he did not timely respond. (DE 21 ¶ 5; DE
21-2 at 2).
On October 13, 2015, Thompson’s counsel sent Press-Seal an email providing a settlement
demand, but he did not address Thompson’s outstanding discovery requests. (DE 21 ¶ 6). PressSeal responded that it would be proceeding with its motion to compel. (DE 21 ¶ 6). The following
day, October 14, 2015, Press-Seal filed the instant motion to compel (DE 21), together with a
certification under Local Rule 37-1(a) (DE 21-3). As stated earlier, Thompson has not responded to
the motion to compel, and the time to do so has now passed.
B. Applicable Law
Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37, a party is permitted to file a motion to compel
discovery where another party fails to respond to interrogatories or requests for production of
documents. See Redmond v. Leatherwood, No. 06-C-1242, 2009 WL 212974, at *1 (E.D. Wis. Jan.
29, 2009). Together with the motion to compel, a party must file “a separate certification that the
party has conferred in good faith or attempted to confer with the other affected parties in an effort to
resolve the matter raised in the motion without court action.” N.D. Ind. L.R. 37-1(a); see Fed. R.
Civ. P. 37(a)(1). “A motion to compel discovery pursuant to Rule 37(a) is addressed to the sound
discretion of the trial court.” Redmond, 2009 WL 212974, at *1 (citation omitted).
C. Discussion
The Court finds that Press-Seal has adequately attempted to confer in good faith with
Thompson in an effort to resolve this matter without Court action. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(1); N.D.
Ind. L.R. 37-1(a). Thompson appears to have simply ignored Press-Seal’s outstanding discovery
requests, Press-Seal’s counsel’s attempt at consultations, and Press-Seal’s motion to compel.
Consequently, the Court will GRANT the motion to compel (DE 21) and order Thompson to answer
2
Press-Seal’s First Set of Interrogatories (DE 31-1) and respond to Press-Seal’s First Request for
Production of Documents (DE 31-2) on or before November 18, 2015. See, e.g., Redmond, 2009
WL 212974, at *1, 3 (granting plaintiff’s motion to compel where defendants appeared to have
“entirely ignored the plaintiff’s discovery requests”).
D. Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons, Press-Seal’s Motion to Compel (DE 21) is GRANTED.
Thompson shall answer Press-Seal’s First Set of Interrogatories (DE 31-1) and respond to PressSeal’s First Request for Production of Documents (DE 31-2) on or before November 19, 2015.
SO ORDERED.
Enter for this 5th day of November 2015.
/s/ Susan Collins
Susan Collins
United States Magistrate Judge
3
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?