Baldwin v. Geico General Insurance Company et al
ORDER denying 37 Motion to Compel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe on 10/2/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JM)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
ROGER DORN BALDWIN,
GEICO GENERAL INSURANCE
COMPANY, et al.,
Case No. 2:17-cv-00807-RFB-NJK
(Docket No. 37)
Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion to compel. Docket No. 37. The “argument”
presented consists primarily of a block quotation of Rule 26, brief discussion of an insurer’s duty of
good faith, and copying-and-pasting the discovery and objections thereto. Docket No. 37 at 6-14.
Discovery disputes are not immune from the basic requirement that parties meaningfully develop their
arguments. See, e.g., Kor Media Group, LLC v. Green, 294 F.R.D. 579, 582 n.3 (D. Nev. 2013).
Identifying discovery objections and asserting without elaboration that they “are frivolous and without
merit,” see Docket No. 37 at 12, is woefully insufficient to permit judicial review. Accordingly, the
motion to compel is DENIED without prejudice. Any renewed motion must present specific, developed
argument separately for each disputed discovery request addressing each objection.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: October 2, 2017
NANCY J. KOPPE
United States Magistrate Judge
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?