Cortez et al v. Pharma Chemie, Inc.

Filing 23

ORDER that plaintiff's Motion sever plaintiffs' claims 22 and Motion to Extend 21 are granted. Plaintiff Rocio Reyes shall respond to defendant's outstanding discovery requests on or before June 18, 2012. Plaintiff's counsel shall advise the Court and opposing counsel on or before July 13, 2012, whether Monica Cortez will remain as a plaintiff in this action. Defendant's Motion to Compel 18 is denied without prejudice. Ordered by Senior Judge Lyle E. Strom. (ADB)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
MONICA CORTEZ and ROCIO
REYES,

)
)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
)
v.
)
)
PHARMA CHEMI, INC., a
)
Nebraska corporation,
)
)
Defendant.
)
______________________________)

8:11CV228

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on defendant’s motion
to compel discovery (Filing No. 18, with index of evidence,
Filing No. 19).

In response to the motion to compel discovery,

plaintiffs filed a motion for enlargement of time to respond to
discovery (Filing No. 21) and a motion to sever claims (Filing
No. 22).

Plaintiffs’ counsel states, “During the course of the

litigation, the undersigned Counsel has been unable to maintain
contact with Plaintiff Monica Cortez and, recently, has had no
contact whatsoever with said Plaintiff despite repeated and
consistent efforts by Counsel” (Filing No. 22, at 1).
In addition, “There are outstanding discovery requests
served upon both Plaintiffs by Defendant and Plaintiff Rocio
Reyes has provided her responses to Counsel; . . . The
undersigned believes that he would be remiss to place responses
by Reyes in the record of Cortez’s case without an opportunity to
review those with Cortez as Cortez’s counsel” (Id.).

Consequently, plaintiffs’ counsel “prays this Court sever the
Plaintiffs’ actions and grant such other and further relief as
the Court deems just and equitable” (Id. at 2).

Defendant has

not responded to plaintiffs’ motion to sever.
The Court finds the motion to sever should be granted.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED:
1) Plaintiffs’ motion to sever claims (Filing No. 22)
and motion for enlargement of time to respond to discovery
(Filing No. 21) are granted.

Now that the claims are severed,

each of the plaintiffs will promptly proceed with discovery.
2) Plaintiff Rocio Reyes shall respond to defendant’s
outstanding discovery requests on or before June 18, 2012.
3) Plaintiff’s counsel shall advise the Court and
opposing counsel on or before July 13, 2012, whether Monica
Cortez will remain as a plaintiff in this action.
4) Defendant’s motion to compel (Filing No. 18) is
denied without prejudice.
DATED this 12th day of June, 2012.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Lyle E. Strom
______________________________
LYLE E. STROM, Senior Judge
United States District Court