Hernandez et al v. Creative Concepts, Inc. et al

Filing 236

ORDER Granting 207 Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Directed to All Pro Se Defendants. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Pro Se Defendants MUST respond to discovery by 05/03/2013. See Order for details. Signed by Magistrate Judge Cam Ferenbach on 04/18/2013. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - AC)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
4

DISTRICT OF NEVADA
5

***
6
7
8

GABRIEL HERNANDEZ, et al.,

2:10-cv-02132-PMP -VCF

9

Plaintiffs,
10

vs.

ORDER

CREATIVE CONCEPTS, et al.,

(Motion to Compel Discovery to All Pro Se
Defendants #207)

11
12

Defendants.
13

Before the court is plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel Directed to All Pro Se Defendants. (#207).
14

Defendants did not file an Opposition.
15

Motion To Compel
16

Plaintiffs assert in their motion to compel that they sent written discovery to each of the pro
17

se defendants (#207 Exhibit A), but that none of the pro se defendants responded. (#207). Plaintiffs
18

also assert that defendant John Speidel refuses to de deposed in this action, and that he “halted” the
19

deposition in California on the first day due to a medical condition, and “halted” the deposition on the
20

second day after only a small number of questions. Id. Plaintiffs state that Speidel should be compelled
21

to continue his deposition. Id. The plaintiffs also contend that Speidel is in control of approximately
22

15-20 boxes of original documents relating to the NPL Sponsorship Program, and that he refuses to turn
23

over the originals for safe keeping to any counsel in this matter. Id. The plaintiffs state that they have
24

good cause to believe that the documents will be lost, destroyed, or made otherwise unavailable based
25

on the history of Speidel’s actions. Id. No opposition to the motion was filed.

1
2

Plaintiffs ask this court to enter an order (1) compelling the Defendants to respond to discovery
3

and provide complete answers to all outstanding discovery without objection, (2) requiring Speidel to
4

appear for his deposition, and (3) compelling Speidel to produce all boxes containing original
5

documents so that the materials can be accessed by counsel in this case and safeguarded for trial. Id.
6

As the pro se defendants did not file an opposition to the motion (#207) and did not dispute any of the
7

arguments made by plaintiffs, the court finds that granting the motion is appropriate. See Local Rule 78

2(d)(“[t]he failure of an opposing party to file points and authorities in response to any motion shall
9

constitute a consent to the granting of the motion.”).
10

Accordingly and for good cause shown,
11

IT IS ORDERED that plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel Directed to All Pro Se Defendants (#207) is
12

GRANTED.
13

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:
14

(1) on or before May 3, 2013, pro se defendants must respond to discovery and provide
15

complete answers to all outstanding discovery without objection,
16

(2) plaintiffs may notice John Speidel’s deposition for a time on or before May 10, 2013, and
17

Speidel must appear for his deposition,
18

(3) on or before May 3, 2013, John Speidel must produce all boxes of original documents to
19

plaintiffs’ counsel,
20

(4) plaintiffs’ counsel must meet with defense counsel to agree upon the appropriate manner in
21

which to store the boxes until trial, and
22

(5) failure to comply with this order will result in the imposition of sanctions.
23

DATED this 17th day of April, 2013.
24

_________________________
CAM FERENBACH
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

25

2