Hinton et al v. MDM Restaurants, Inc.

Filing 49

ORDER GRANTING as Unopposed Plaintiff's 35 Motion to Compel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti. (MWil)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION JESSA HINTON, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Case No. 2:17-cv-14036 District Judge Nancy G. Edmunds Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti MDM RESTAURANTS, INC., Defendant. _________________________/ ORDER GRANTING AS UNOPPOSED PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO COMPEL NON-PARTY ACCUFORM BUSINESS SYSTEMS, INC. TO COMPLY WITH SUBPOENA (DE 35) AND CANCELLING HEARING NOTICED FOR NOVEMBER 2, 2018 (DE 38) Currently before the Court is Plaintiffs’ September 28, 2018 motion to compel non-party Accuform Business Systems, Inc. to comply with subpoena, which has been referred to me. (DEs 35, 36.) This motion initially was set for hearing on November 2, 2018 at 2:00 p.m. (DE 38.) However, pursuant to E.D Mich. LR 7.1(f)(2), this motion will be determined without oral argument. (DE 45.) According to the motion, which is supported by attached email correspondence, counsel for Plaintiffs issued and served an amended record subpoena to non-party Accuform Business Systems, Inc. (Accuform) on June 20, 2018 to produce six categories of documents. (DEs 35, 35-1 at 5-14.) On June 28, 2018, attorney Brian Daley contacted Plaintiffs’ counsel, stated that he had been retained to represent non-party Accuform in relation to the subpoena, and requested an extension of time until July 27, 2018 to respond to the subpoena. (DE 35-1 at 16-17.) However, non-party Accuform never objected to the subpoena pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 45, or otherwise responded to it. Counsel for Plaintiffs contacted Mr. Daley by email on August 1 and August 12, 2018 regarding the status of non-party Accuform’s response to the subpoena, and left a voicemail for Mr. Daley on August 16, 2018, but he never received a response. (DEs 35 at ¶ 9, 35-1 at 16.) Plaintiffs filed the instant motion to compel on September 28, 2018, seeking an order compelling non-party Accuform to comply with the subpoena and produce responsive documents. (DE 35.) “A response to a nondispositive motion must be filed within 14 days after service of the motion.” E.D. Mich. LR 7.1(e)(2)(B). Thus, in the absence of a scheduling order stating otherwise, Accuform’s response to Plaintiffs’ September 28, 2018 motion (DE 35) would have been due on or about October 15, 2018. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(a), 6(d). To date, Accuform has not responded to Plaintiffs’ motion. The local court rules of the Eastern District of Michigan required Accuform to file a response if it wished to oppose Plaintiffs’ motion to compel. See E.D. Mich. LR 7.1(c)(1) (“A respondent opposing a motion must file a response, 2   including a brief and supporting documents then available.”) (emphasis added). Opposition to a motion is deemed waived if the responding party fails to respond or otherwise oppose the motion. See Humphrey v. United State Attorney General’s Office, 279 F. App’x 328, 331 (6th Cir. 2008). Because Accuform has not responded to Plaintiffs’ motion to compel it to comply with the subpoena, Plaintiffs’ motion can and will be construed as unopposed. Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ motion to compel non-party Accuform Business Systems, Inc. to comply with subpoena is GRANTED as unopposed as follows: 1. Nonparty Accuform Business Systems, Inc. is ORDERED to respond to Plaintiffs’ amended subpoena and produce the requested documents to Plaintiffs by MONDAY, NOVEMBER 12, 2018. All objections are deemed waived. 2. Counsel for Plaintiffs shall serve a copy of this Order on counsel for nonparty Accuform Business Systems, Inc. forthwith by email and overnight courier, and file proofs of service for the same with the Court. In addition, the hearing noticed for November 2, 2018 (DE 38) is CANCELLED. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: November 2, 2018 s/Anthony P. Patti Anthony P. Patti UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 3   Certificate of Service I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was sent to parties of record on November 2 , 2018, electronically and/or by U.S. Mail. s/Michael Williams Case Manager for the Honorable Anthony P. Patti 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?