Castillo, IV v. 6D Global Technologies, Inc. et al

Filing 310

ORDER terminating 307 Letter Motion for Discovery; terminating 308 Letter Motion for Discovery. Defendant seeks reconsideration of the Court's Order imposing attorney's fees on the grounds that he has now produced responsive docume nts and because his failure to comply previously with Court orders was unintentional. The motion is DENIED...Court orders are not advisory, to which a party may choose to follow or not. Although Defendant contends that he has now complied fully wit h his discovery obligations Plaintiffs dispute this; but this question is not yet before the Court his failure to follow Court orders is undisputed...To avoid this problem in the future, the parties shall respond to discovery disputes within three business days pursuant to this Court's Individual Rules of Practice. The Clerk of Court is respectfully requested to terminate the motions at ECF Nos. 307 & 308. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn on 11/22/2021) (ras)

deadline for the “substantial completion of document discovery.” But Defendant’s failures are
with respect to interim deadlines, deadlines that he permitted to come and go without action.
Defendant also pleads that these deadlines were too onerous because of the sprawling nature of
discovery. But self-help is not the solution. Finally, Defendant claims that his failure to respond
to Plaintiff’s motion was justified because he had 14 days to respond under the Federal Rules. To
avoid this problem in the future, the parties shall respond to discovery disputes within three
business days pursuant to this Court’s Individual Rules of Practice.
The Clerk of Court is respectfully requested to terminate the motions at ECF Nos. 307 &
308.
SO ORDERED.

DATED:

New York, New York
November 22, 2021

2