Moore v. Pantoja et al

Filing 54

ORDER denying 52 Second Motion to Compel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Charles B Goodwin on 03/08/2017. (jb)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA CHARLES LEE MOORE II, Plaintiff, v. LT. PANTOJA et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. CIV-15-688-HE ORDER This matter is before the Court on the pro se Plaintiff’s second motion to compel. See Pl.’s Mot. (Doc. No. 52) at 1. Specifically, Plaintiff asserts that Defendant Pantoja, who is the sole remaining defendant in this case, refuses to “directly and fully” answer ten interrogatories that Plaintiff believes are relevant to his claim. Id. at 1, 2. Plaintiff certifies that he has attempted in good faith to “confer[] with the person or party failing to make disclosure or discovery in an effort to obtain it without court action.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(1); see Pl.’s Mot. at 2-3. Plaintiff has not provided the Court with a copy, or at least an adequate description, of his proffered interrogatories and Defendant’s allegedly incomplete responses. See, e.g., Pl.’s Mot. at 2 ¶ 12 (“Defendant Pantoja can answer to the extent that he has personal knowledge (Interrogatory #8). For example, was Defendant Pantoja interviewed himself.”). Without this information, the Court cannot determine whether Defendant Pantoja can be compelled to produce the discovery that Plaintiff seeks. See generally Witt v. GC Servs. Ltd. P’ship, 307 F.R.D. 554, 559-71 (D. Colo. 2014); Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(1), 33(a)-(b), 37(a). Moreover, some of Plaintiff’s interrogatories appear to seek information that is not relevant to Plaintiff’s sole remaining claim that Defendant Pantoja physically assaulted Plaintiff on November 24, 2014. See Pl.’s Mot. at 2 ¶ 13 (“Defendant Pantoja can answer whether female staff were present for the strip search of Plaintiff during the cell search (Interrogatory #9).”). Accordingly, Plaintiff’s second motion to compel discovery responses (Doc. No. 52) is DENIED without prejudice to refiling. IT IS SO ORDERED this 8th day of March, 2017. 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?