Aunhkhotep v. Kipperstein et al

Filing 41

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs motion to compel and for an order to deem facts admitted 39 is denied without prejudice, and the motion to substitute 40 is denied as moot. Signed by Sr. District Judge Rodney W. Sippel on 02/05/2024. (KRZ)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION AUNHK RA AUNHKHOTEP, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) OFFICER JOSEPH KOPFENSTEINER, ) et al., ) ) Defendants. ) Case No. 4:23 CV 540 RWS MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on plaintiff’s “Motion for Court Order to Deem Facts Admitted and for Additional Order Compelling Disclosure of Interrogatories” [39] and “Motion to Substitute Federal Civil Procedure Rule.” [40]. These motions will be denied without prejudice. In the motion to compel, plaintiff does not indicate whether an order is sought because no responses have been provided, or whether plaintiff believes the responses which were provided were insufficient. In future discovery motions, plaintiff shall set out the nature of dispute in the motion itself, as well as the efforts that have been made to resolve the dispute prior to filing the motion. The Court is denying the “motion to deem facts admitted” without prejudice at well. If plaintiff later (for example, in a dispositive motion) seeks to rely on a fact that was admitted, plaintiff shall so state in the motion, provide the appropriate admission, and at that point the Court will determine whether a fact is deemed admitted. Because the Court is denying this motion, it is likewise denying as moot the motion to substitute Rule 36 for Rule 34 in the motion. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion to compel and for an order to deem facts admitted [39] is denied without prejudice, and the motion to substitute [40] is denied as moot. RODNEY W. SIPPEL UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dated this 5th day of February, 2024. 2

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?