Patel v. Patel et al
Filing
178
MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Magistrate Judge Theresa Carroll Buchanan on 7/21/2016. (dvanm, )
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
Alexandria Division
SHRADDHA PATEL,
Plaintiff,
V,
KIRIT PATEL,
Civ.
No.
I;15cv598
et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
THIS MATTER originally came before the Court on Defendant
Atul Patel's Motion to Compel Plaintiff's Shraddha Patel
Responses and Objections to Defendant's Atul Patel First Set of
Request for Production of Documents (Dkt. 83) and Defendant Nina
Patel's Motion to Compel Plaintiff s Shraddha Patel Responses
and Objections to Defendant's Nina Patel First Set of Request
for Production of Documents (Dkt. 86), both of which the Court
granted on February 26, 2016. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
37(a)(5)(A) provides that the Court must order the party whose
conduct necessitated the motion to pay the movant's reasonable
expenses, including attorneys' fees. The Court, in considering
the motion, found that plaintiff's failure to provide discovery
necessitated defendants' motions and plaintiff's nondisclosure
was not substantially justified. This matter comes again before
the Court on Defendant's Atul Patel and Nina Patel Motion for
Attorney's Fees (Dkt. 109), which asks for the fees and costs
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?