Beeper Vibes, Inc. v. Simon Property Group, Inc. et al

Filing 28

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO COMPEL (Doc. 24 ) AS MOOT. Signed by Judge Timothy S. Black on 8/27/12. (mr1)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION
BEEPER VIBES, INC.,

Case No. 3:10-cv-473

Plaintiff,
Judge Timothy S. Black
vs.
SIMON PROPERTY GROUP, INC., et al.,
Defendants.
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO COMPEL (Doc. 24) AS
MOOT
This civil action is pending before the Court on Defendants’ motion to compel
(Doc. 24) and Plaintiff’s responsive memorandum (Doc. 27). After filing the motion to
compel, the Court sua sponte set the action for an informal dispute conference pursuant to
S.D. Ohio Civ. R. 37.1.1 At the conference, Plaintiff agreed to submit all outstanding
discovery. Subsequently, both parties confirmed that the outstanding discovery at issue in
the motion to compel was provided. Accordingly, the motion to compel (Doc. 24) is
DENIED as MOOT.
The only issue left outstanding is Defendants’ request for fees. Defendant requests
that the Court award reasonable expenses, including attorney fees, incurred in bringing
the motion to compel. Rule 37(A)(5) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires the
awarding of reasonable expenses, including attorneys’ fees, in the event a motion to

1

Had Defendants initially contacted the Court pursuant to S.D. Ohio Civ. R. 37.1, they would
not have incurred any additional expense in preparing a motion to compel, and the issue would have been
resolved expeditiously.

compel is granted or the requested discovery is provided after the filing of the motion.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(A)(5). However, the Court shall not order payment if: (i) the movant
filed the motion before attempting in good faith to obtain the disclosure or discovery
without court action; (ii) the opposing party’s nondisclosure, response, or objection was
substantially justified; or (iii) other circumstances make an award of expenses unjust. Id.
Given the circumstances of this case, and Plaintiff’s prompt production of all
outstanding discovery requests, the Court finds that an award of fees would be unjust and
therefore declines to award them in this context.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Timothy S. Black
Timothy S. Black
United States District Judge

Date: 8/27/12

-2-