Njos v. United States Of America
Filing
79
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 42 Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Discovery and enlarge Discovery deadlines; denying 47 Plaintiff's Motion to Clarify; denying 57 Plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment; and, denying as moot 33 Plaintiffs motion to take written depositions. Signed by Honorable Edwin M. Kosik on 2/1/2017 (emksec, )
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
SCOTT J. NJOS,
Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant.
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
CIVIL NO. 3:15-CV-931
(Judge Kosik)
ORDER
NOW, THIS 1st DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017, in accordance with the accompanying
Memorandum, it is hereby ORDERED THAT:
1.
Plaintiff’s motion to take written depositions (Doc. 33) is DENIED as moot.
Plaintiff is given thirty (30) days to demonstrate to the court how he will meet
the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 31 in accordance with the accompanying
Memorandum. If Plaintiff is unable to do so, discovery is enlarged for a period
of sixty (60) days from today’s date to permit Plaintiff to serve interrogatory
questions upon Defendant, and for Defendant to respond thereto.
2.
Plaintiff’s motion to compel discovery and enlarge the discovery deadline
(Doc. 42) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The motion is
GRANTED to the extent that discovery is enlarged for a period of sixty (60)
days to allow Plaintiff to properly serve his Request for Admissions and
Request for Production of Documents upon Defendant within thirty (30) days,
and receive responses thereto within the next thirty (30) days. This must be the
same Requests filed with the court, and cannot be supplemented by Plaintiff.
The motion is DENIED in all other respects.
3.
Plaintiff’s motion for clarification (Doc. 47) is DENIED.
4.
Plaintiff’s motion for default judgment (Doc. 57) is DENIED.
s/Edwin M. Kosik
EDWIN M. KOSIK
United States District Judge
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?