Colony Insurance Company v. Kuehn et al

Filing 25

ORDER Granting 18 Motion to Compel. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the hearing on this matter scheduled for 4/28/2011 is VACATED. Signed by Magistrate Judge George Foley, Jr on 4/20/2011. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLR)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6
7
8
9
10
11

COLONY INSURANCE CO.,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
HAROLD KUEHN, et al.,
)
)
Defendants. )
__________________________________________)

Case No. 2:10-cv-01943-KJD-GWF
ORDER
Motion to Compel (#18)

12
13

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Colony Insurance Company’s Notice of Motion and

14

Motion to Compel Discovery From Defendants Harold Kuehn, Thomas Gibson and Gibson & Kuehn,

15

LLP (#18), filed March 29, 2011.

16

Plaintiff requests an order compelling 1) Defendant Harold Kuehn to respond to Colony

17

Insurance Co.’s first set of interrogatories and first set of requests for production; 2) Defendants

18

Thomas Gibson and the law firm of Gibson & Kuehn, LLP to respond to Colony Insurance Co.’s first

19

set of requests for production; and (3) Defendant Kuehn, Gibson and Gibson & Kuehn to provide their

20

Fed.R.Civ.P. 26 initial disclosures. (#18). To date, no party has responded to this motion and the time

21

for opposition has now passed. LR 7-2(d) states in pertinent part, that “[t]he failure of an opposing

22

party to file points and authorities in response to any motion shall constitute a consent to the granting of

23

the motion.” As a result, the Court will grant Plaintiff’s motion to compel (#18).

24

In addition, because Defendants failed to timely respond to Plaintiff’s discovery requests,

25

Defendants shall substantively respond without objection. A party who fails to serve responses or

26

objections in a timely manner has waived any and all objections to discovery requests. Fed.R.Civ.P.

27

33(b), 34(b); Richmark Corp. v. Timber Falling Consultants, 959 F.2d 1468, 1473 (9th Cir. 1992)

28

(finding waiver of objections due to untimely response to requests for production); David v. Fendler,

1

650 F.2d 1154, 1160 (9th Cir. 1981) (finding waiver of objections due to untimely response to

2

interrogatories). See also Senat v. City of New York, 255 F.R.D. 338, 339 (E.D.N.Y. 2009) (stating that

3

“there is consistent authority that a failure to serve timely responses to interrogatories and document

4

requests serves as a waiver of objections.”); Ramirez v. County of Los Angeles, 231 F.R.D. 407, 409-10

5

(C.D.Cal. 2005). Accordingly,

6

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff Colony Insurance Company’s Motion to Compel

7

Discovery From Defendants Harold Kuehn, Thomas Gibson and Gibson & Kuehn, LLP (#18) is

8

granted as follows:

9

1.

10
11

Defendant Harold Kuehn shall substantively respond without objection to Plaintiff’s first
set of interrogatories and first set of request for production by May 9, 2011;

2.

Defendants Thomas Gibson and the law firm of Gibson & Kuehn, LLP shall

12

substantively respond without objection to Plaintiff’s first set of requests for production

13

by May 9, 2011; and

14
15
16
17
18

3.

Defendant Kuehn, Gibson and Gibson & Kuehn shall provide their Fed.R.Civ.P. 26
initial disclosures to Plaintiff by May 9, 2011.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the hearing on this matter scheduled for Thursday, April 28,
2011 is vacated.
DATED this 20th day of April, 2011.

19
20
21

_____________________________________
GEORGE FOLEY, JR.
United States Magistrate Judge

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2