Direct Line Corporation v. Carrington et al

Filing 112

ORDER: For the reasons explained in the accompanying Memorandum, defendant Carrington's Objections 109 to the Magistrate Judge's sua sponte Report & Recommendation 104 are SUSTAINED, and the Report & Recommendation is REJECTED in total. Additionally, the Magistrate Judge's June 1, 2011 Order 89 that deemed admitted 226 requests for admission is hereby VACATED. In light of this, the defendant's Motion for Reconsideration 96 of that Order is DENIED AS MOOT. The defendan t's Motion for Extension 68 is GRANTED. From the date of this Order, the defendant shall have 30 days to respond to all outstanding discovery, including the 226 requests for admission. Signed by District Judge Aleta A. Trauger on 7/25/11. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(tmw)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
NASHVILLE DIVISION
DIRECT LINE CORPORATION,
Plaintiff,
v.
MICHAEL L. CARRINGTON and
JOHN DOE(S),
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 3:10-0423
Judge Trauger

ORDER
For the reasons explained in the accompanying Memorandum, defendant Carrington’s
Objections (Docket No. 109) to the Magistrate Judge’s sua sponte Report & Recommendation
(Docket No. 104) are SUSTAINED, and the Report & Recommendation is REJECTED in total.
Additionally, the Magistrate Judge’s June 1, 2011 Order (Docket No. 89) that deemed
admitted 226 requests for admission is hereby VACATED. In light of this, the defendant’s
Motion for Reconsideration (Docket No. 96) of that Order is DENIED AS MOOT.
The defendant’s Motion for Extension (Docket No. 68) is GRANTED. From the date of
this Order, the defendant shall have 30 days to respond to all outstanding discovery, including
the 226 requests for admission. After the expiration of that 30-day window, the plaintiff may
renew any discovery objections, and the parties shall confer with Judge Knowles regarding the
status of discovery, the entry of a new scheduling order, and a trial date. While this matter is
referred back to Judge Knowles, he should refrain from ruling on the pending Motion to Compel
(Docket No. 84) until the status of discovery becomes more clear following the expiration of the

30-day window.
It is so ordered.
Enter this 25th day of July 2011.
ALETA A. TRAUGER
United States District Judge