McQueen v. Department of Veterans Affairs

Filing 21

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER : IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff is granted an extension of time, until April 20, 2018, to answer Defendant's Interrogatories.IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant's Motion to Compel (Doc. 17) is deniedwithout prejudice. Defendant may renew its Motion to Compel if Plaintiff does not fully comply with Defendant's discovery requests by April 20, 2018. Signed by Magistrate Judge Abbie Crites-Leoni on 4/12/2018. (JMC)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
SOUTHEASTERN DIVISION

ALAN McQUEEN,
Plaintiff,
vs.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 1:17CV155 ACL

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Presently pending before the Court is Defendant’s Motion to Compel Plaintiff’s Answers
to Defendant’s Interrogatories and Requests to Produce pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 37(a)(3)(B). (Doc. 17.)
In its Motion, Defendant states that the Government served its Interrogatories and
Requests to Produce on Plaintiff on February 1, 2018, and Plaintiff’s responses to this discovery
were due on March 6, 2018. (Doc. 17.) Defendant indicates that, despite Defendant’s multiple
attempts to obtain the discovery without the Court’s invention, Plaintiff has failed to answer the
Interrogatories or produce the responsive documents.
A hearing was held on Defendant’s Motion on this date, at which both parties appeared in
person.

Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, represented that he provided the requested

documents to Defendant’s attorney immediately prior to the hearing. Defendant’s attorney
confirmed that Plaintiff had provided him a file folder containing documents. Plaintiff testified
that he had not yet answered Defendant’s Interrogatories, and requested additional time in which
to do so. The Court granted Plaintiff’s oral request for an extension, and gave Plaintiff until
April 20, 2018, to answer Defendant’s Interrogatories.
1

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37, “[a] party seeking discovery may move
for an order compelling an answer, designation, production, or inspection.” Fed. R. Civ. P.
37(a)(3)(B).
Although Plaintiff is acting pro se, and his pleadings are held to a less stringent standard,
he must still comply with the Rules of Civil Procedure, including local rules. See American
Inmate Paralegal Assoc. v. Cline, 859 F.2d 59, 61 (8th Cir. 1988).
The Court will deny Defendant’s Motion to Compel without prejudice, meaning that it
may be brought again at a later time if Plaintiff fails to timely provide the requested discovery.

Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff is granted an extension of time, until April
20, 2018, to answer Defendant’s Interrogatories.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion to Compel (Doc. 17) is denied
without prejudice. Defendant may renew its Motion to Compel if Plaintiff does not fully
comply with Defendant’s discovery requests by April 20, 2018.

ABBIE CRITES-LEONI
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Dated this 12th day of April, 2018.

2