Barnes v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

Filing 139

ORDER denying ECF No. 138 Motion to Disregard. Defendant's Supplemental Response to ECF No. 125 Motion to Compel due by 7/26/2019. Signed by Magistrate Judge William G. Cobb on 7/12/2019. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - LH)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

8
9
10
11
12
13

PATRICIA G. BARNES,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
NANCY A. BERRYHILL,
)
Acting Commissioner Social Security
)
Administration,
)
)
Defendant.
)
______________________________________)

3:18-cv-00199-MMD-WGC
ORDER
Re: ECF No. 125

14
15

Before the court is Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel (ECF No. 125), Defendant’s opposition

16

(ECF No. 132) and Plaintiff’s reply (titled as, “Plaintiff’s Response to Defendant’s Opposition . . .”

17

(ECF No. 134).

18

Plaintiff’s motion identifies some seventeen (17) interrogatories/requests for production to which

19

Plaintiff claims she received to be, in one fashion or another, inadequate, evasive or incomplete.

20

(ECF No. 125.) While Plaintiff discusses the general content of her requested discovery, Plaintiff did

21

not, as Defendant argued in its opposition, “set forth in full the text of the discovery originally sought

22

and any response to it,” as is required by LR 26-7(b). (Defendant’s opposition, ECF No. 132.)

23

Defendant also challenges whether Plaintiff undertook a good faith effort to resolve the discovery

24

dispute prior to filing her discovery motion. (Id. at 2.) As such, Defendant only addressed the technical

25

and procedural aspects of Plaintiff’s motion, not any of the substantive issues presented by the discovery

26

dispute.

27

In reply, Plaintiff incorporated into her filing the text of her First Interrogatories (ECF No. 134

28

at 3-9); the text of Defendant’s answer to Plaintiff’s interrogatories (Id. at 10-27); the text of Plaintiff’s

1

First Request for Production of Documents (Id. at 28-32) and the text of Defendant’s responses (not

2

including any documents identified in the response (Id. at 33-44.)

3

Just as Defendant’s opposition did not include any substantive argument on the merits, Plaintiff’s

4

reply was limited, essentially, to supplying the documents which should have initially accompanied

5

Plaintiff’s motion to compel.

6

The court agrees with Defendant’s argument that the failure to include these discovery items at

7

the outset “inhibits the ability of the court to meaningfully evaluate Plaintiff’s motion.” (ECF No. 132

8

at 2, citing Shuffle Master v. Progressive Games, 170 F.R.D. 166, 170 (D. Nev. 1996).)

9

Now that the actual text of the disputed discovery is before the court, the court deems it

10

appropriate for the Defendant to re-address Plaintiff’s motion/reply in a supplemental opposition

11

memorandum, which will be due on or before July 26, 2019. Plaintiff will thereafter be able to file a

12

supplemental reply memorandum within ten (10) days of Defendant’s service of its supplemental

13

opposition.

14

The court also notes the Defendant’s argument about whether Plaintiff satisfied her LR 26-7(c)

15

meet and confer obligation. While the court does not mean to diminish the importance of a serious meet

16

and confer, nor Plaintiff’s failure to “set forth the details and results of the meet-and-confer . . . about

17

each disputed discovery request,” in the present matter it is apparent there is a very acrimonious

18

relationship between Plaintiff and defense counsel. A follow-up meet and confer would likely not be

19

productive.

20

Also before the court is Defendant’s “Motion to Disregard Plaintiff’s Response” because the

21

documents exceeded the LR 7-3 page limitation on reply memoranda. (ECF No. 138.) Because

22

Plaintiff’s memorandum essentially provided materials that should have been filed with the motion to

23

compel as exhibits, Defendant’s motion (ECF No. 138) is DENIED.

24

DATED: July 12, 2019.

25
26

____________________________________
WILLIAM G. COBB
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

27
28
2