Freeman v. Rochester Psychiatric Center et al

Filing 105

DECISION & ORDER denying without prejudice 102 Motion to Compel as premature. (Motions to Compel deadline extended to 6/1/2015). Signed by Hon. Marian W. Payson on 4/14/2015. (KAH)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK _______________________________________ DWAYNE FREEMAN, DECISION & ORDER Plaintiff, 12-CV-6045T v. ROCHESTER PSYCHIATRIC CENTER, Defendant. _______________________________________ On January 25, 2012, pro se plaintiff Dwayne Freeman (“Freeman”) filed this action against the Rochester Psychiatric Center (the “Center”) under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e, et. seq. (Docket # 1). Currently pending before this Court is a motion to compel filed by Freeman. (Docket # 102). Specifically, Freeman’s pending motion seeks to compel responses from the Center to his (1) discovery requests filed and served on March 25, 2015 (Docket # 97); (2) interrogatories filed and served on March 31, 2015 (Docket # 99), and, (3) discovery requests filed and served on April 1, 2015 (Docket # 100). Rules 33(b)(2) and 34(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provide a thirty-day deadline for responding to discovery requests and interrogatories. Fed. R. Civ. P. 33(b)(2) and 34(b)(2). Therefore, any motion seeking to compel a response to those requests is premature. The Court expects that the Center will comply with the deadlines under Rules 33(b)(2) and 34(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in responding to Freeman’s outstanding requests. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, Freeman’s motion to compel (Docket # 102) is DENIED without prejudice as premature. The deadline for filing motions to compel set forth in this Court’s October 29, 2014 Order (Docket # 80) is hereby extended to June 1, 2015. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Marian W. Payson MARIAN W. PAYSON United States Magistrate Judge Dated: Rochester, New York April 14, 2015 2

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?