St Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Co et al v. Caterpillar Inc

Filing 12

MEMORANDUM ORDER granting #9 Motion to Compel. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, within fourteen (14) days of the date of this order, plaintiffs shall fully and completely respond to defendant's Interrogatories and Requests for Production as set forth in Exhibit A to the motion to compel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Karen L Hayes on 11/01/11. (crt,Yocum, M)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
MONROE DIVISION
ST. PAUL FIRE AND MARINE
INSURANCE COMPANY, as subrogee
of/and the LOUISIANA RURAL
PARISH INSURANCE
COOPERATIVE

*

CIVIL ACTION NO. 11-0816

VERSUS

*

JUDGE DONALD E. WALTER

CATERPILLAR, INC.

*

MAG. JUDGE KAREN L. HAYES

MEMORANDUM ORDER
Before the court is a motion to compel discovery responses [doc. # 9] filed by defendant
Caterpillar, Inc. (“Caterpillar”).1
On July 6, 2011, Caterpillar propounded certain interrogatories and requests for
production to plaintiffs. See M/Compel, Exh. A. Despite repeated assurances from plaintiffs’
counsel that he would respond to the discovery, he has yet to do so. With the scheduling
deadlines rapidly approaching, Caterpillar protectively filed the instant motion to compel on
September 26, 2011. On October 19, 2011, plaintiffs responded to the motion by stating that
they intended to answer the outstanding discovery by October 31, 2011. See Pl. Response
Memo. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that the motion to compel discovery responses [doc. # 9] filed by

1

As this is not one of the motions excepted in 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A), nor dispositive
of any claim on the merits within the meaning of Rule 72 of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure, this ruling is issued under the authority thereof, and in accordance with the standing
order of this court. Any appeal must be made to the district judge in accordance with Rule 72(a)
and L.R. 74.1(W).

defendant Caterpillar, Inc. is hereby GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, within fourteen (14) days of the date of this order,
plaintiffs shall fully and completely respond to defendant’s Interrogatories and Requests for
Production as set forth in Exhibit A to the motion to compel.2
THUS DONE AND SIGNED in chambers, at Monroe, Louisiana, this 1st day of
November, 2011.

2

By failing to timely respond to the discovery, and in the absence of good cause shown,
plaintiffs have waived their right to object to the discovery requests. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 33(b); In
Re U.S., 864 F.2d 1153, 1156 (5th Cir. 1989).
2