Babjak v. Arcelormittal USA Inc et al
ORDER: The Court has nothing to add or take away and fully adopts Judge Cherry's recommendations as its own. Accordingly, the Court DENIES Plaintiff's 71 Motion for Default Judgment; DECLINES to award reasonable expenses under Federal R ule of Civil Procedure 37(b)(2)(C); SETS the deadline for Rule 30(b)(6) depositions for 30 days after today's date; ORDERS Plaintiffs to file, within 7 days after the Rule 30(b)(6) depositions, either a motion to reopen discovery or a status rep ort; GRANTS ArcelorMittal's 75 motion for leave to file Rule 56 summary judgment motions except that, no such motion may be filed until the Court holds a dispositive motions and trial scheduling conference. Signed by Judge Joseph S Van Bokkelen on 8/14/2017. (jss)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
Ryan Babjak, et al.,
Case No. 2:15-CV-40 JVB
ArcelorMittal USA, LLC, et al.,
The Court referred to Magistrate Judge Paul Cherry for report and recommendation
Plaintiffs’ motion for default judgment (DE 71) and Defendant Arcelormittal USA’s motion for
leave to file a motion for summary judgment (DE 75). Judge Cherry issued his recommendations
to which Plaintiff objects.
Plaintiff’s motion for default judgment---a drastic one---or the alternative request that
Defendant be prohibited from filing a motion for summary judgment---less drastic but still
severe---arise out of Defendant’s failure to comply with the Court’s order to designate witnesses
and available dates for depositions under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(b)(6). But as Judge
Cherry aptly stated “[i]t appears that the issue between the parties could have been resolved
without the Court’s involvement if Plaintiffs had conferred with Defendants as a first step instead
of filing the instant motion.” (DE 78, Rep. & Rec. at 4.) And it still can, especially since
“Defendant’s failure to comply with the Court’s deadline “though ill-advised and improper, does
not appear to be the result of willfulness or bad faith.” (Id.)
Plaintiffs’ objections to Judge Cherry’s recommendations amount to no more than
repeating the arguments in the original motion, which Judge Cherry thoughtfully considered. In
fact, the Court has nothing to add or take away and fully adopts Judge Cherry’s
recommendations as its own. Accordingly, the Court--
Denies Plaintiffs’ Motion for Default Judgment (DE 71);
declines to award reasonable expenses under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
Sets the deadline for the Rule 30(b)(6) depositions for 30 days after today’s date;
Orders Plaintiffs to file, within 7 days after the Rule 30(b)(6) depositions, either a motion
to reopen discovery for the limited purpose of conducting discovery on newly learned
matters that arose in the depositions or a status report indicating that no additional
discovery is needed;
Grants ArcelorMittal’s motion for leave to file Rule 56 summary judgment motions (DE
75) except that, consistent with this Court’s practice, no such motion may be filed until
the Court holds a dispositive motions and trial scheduling conference.
SO ORDERED on August 14, 2017.
s/ Joseph S. Van Bokkelen
JOSEPH S. VAN BOKKELEN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?