Westwood v. JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A.

Filing 26

ORDER that 22 Motion to Compel Discovery is denied, without prejudice. Signed by Magistrate Judge George Foley, Jr on 5/17/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

5
GIOVANNA WESTWOOD,
6
7
8
9
10
11

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
JP MORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.,
)
)
Defendant.
)
__________________________________________)

Case No. 2:16-cv-02409-RFB-GWF
ORDER

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Discovery (ECF No. 22),

12

filed on May 8, 2017. Plaintiff requests an order compelling Defendant to respond to written

13

discovery including interrogatories and requests for production of documents that Plaintiff served

14

upon Defendant on April 6, 2017. Plaintiff represents that Defendant has not responded.

15

Plaintiff has filed this motion without an attempt to resolve these issues with Defendant’s

16

counsel. The meet and confer requirements in Rule 37(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

17

and Local Rule (“LR”) 26-7(b) require the moving party to confer or attempt to confer in person, or

18

at least by telephone, with the opposing party in a good faith effort to resolve the discovery dispute

19

prior to filing a motion to compel. Shuffle Master v. Progressive Games, 170 F.R.D. 166, 171

20

(D.Nev. 1996); Walker v. North Las Vegas Police Depart., 2016 WL 427063, *2 (D.Nev. Feb. 3,

21

2016). The moving party is also required to include a certification setting forth its efforts and the

22

results of the meet and confer attempts. Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(1); LR 26-7(c). Because Plaintiff’s

23

motion fails to show that she complied with these requirements prior to filing the motion,

24
25
26
27
28

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Discovery (ECF No. 22) is
denied, without prejudice.
DATED this 17th day of May, 2017.
______________________________________
GEORGE FOLEY, JR.
United States Magistrate Judge