CNA Insurance Company Limited v. Expeditors International of Washington Inc et al

Filing 25

ORDER granting Expeditors Defendants' 21 Motion to Compel Discovery Responses from Plaintiff; granting Expeditors' request for attorneys' fees and costs. Signed by Judge Ricardo S. Martinez. (PM)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

7
8

CNA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,

9
10
11
12

Plaintiff,

CASE NO. C18-932RSM
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO
COMPEL

v.
EXPEDITORS INTERNATIONAL OF
WASHINGTON, INC. d/b/a EXPEDITORS
INTERNATIONAL OCEAN, et al.,

13

Defendants.

14
15
16
17
18

I.

INTRODUCTION

This matter is before the Court on Expeditors Defendants’ Motion to Compel Discovery
Responses from Plaintiff. Dkt. #21. Defendants Expeditors International of Washington, Inc.

19

and Expeditors International Ocean, Inc. (“Expeditors”) seek an order compelling Plaintiff to

20

respond to their discovery requests and awarding attorneys’ fees and costs. Id. Plaintiff has not

21

substantively responded. Dkt. #23. For the reasons below, Expeditors’ Motion is granted.

22
23
24
25
26

II.

BACKGROUND

Plaintiff filed this action on June 25, 2018. Dkt. #1. Expeditors indicates that they served
their First Interrogatories and Requests for Production on Plaintiff on February 13, 2019.
Dkt. #22 at ¶ 22. Expeditors’ certificate of service, however, is unclear as to whether service
occurred on February 13th or February 18th. Id. at p.19. Giving Plaintiff the benefit of the doubt
ORDER – 1

1

and concluding that discovery was served no later than February 18, 2019, Plaintiff’s responses

2

were no later than March 25, 2019. FED. R. CIV. P. 33(b)(2); FED. R. CIV. P. 34(b)(2)(A). On

3

March 26, 2019, counsel for Expeditors and counsel for Plaintiff held a telephone conference to

4

discuss the outstanding discovery. Dkt. #22 at ¶ 5. Plaintiff’s counsel was not able to provide a

5
6

date certain by which Expeditors could expect responses to their discovery requests. Id.
Expeditors subsequently filed this Motion.

7
8
9

Plaintiff’s response indicates that counsel of record is “local counsel for plaintiff acting
in this case on instructions from New York counsel.” Dkt. #23-1 at ¶ 2. Counsel of record further

10

explains that “he has had no direct contact with plaintiff in this case but has worked before with

11

New York counsel.” Id. at ¶¶ 2–3. Counsel previously forwarded Expeditors’ discovery to New

12

York for handling and spoke to New York counsel as recently as April 8, 2019 but had no further

13
14
15
16
17

contact as of April 15, 2019. Id. at ¶¶ 3–4. Most recently, Plaintiff’s counsel had heard that New
York counsel’s contact with Plaintiff had been disrupted and that New York counsel was
attempting to reestablish communication. Id. at ¶ 3. Instead of opposing Expeditors’ Motion,
Plaintiff requests a two-week extension to April 29, 2019. Dkt. #23 at 2.
III.

18

DISCUSSION

19

If requested discovery is not answered, the requesting party may move for an order

20

compelling such discovery. FED. R. CIV. P. 37(a)(1). The party that resists discovery has the

21
22
23
24
25

burden to show why the discovery request should be denied. Blankenship v. Hearst Corp., 519
F.2d 418, 429 (9th Cir. 1975). If a motion to compel is granted, the movant may be entitled to
recover reasonable expenses incurred in making the motion, including attorney’s fees. FED. R.
CIV. P. 37(a)(5)(A).

26

ORDER – 2

1

Expeditors are entitled to responses to their discovery and Plaintiff does not argue

2

otherwise. Plaintiff requests additional time. But even the requested extension has expired, and

3

the parties have provided no indication that discovery responses were served. Accordingly,

4

Expeditors’ Motion will be granted, and Expeditors will be awarded their reasonable fees and

5

expenses incurred in bringing this Motion.

6

IV.

CONCLUSION

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

Having reviewed Expeditors’ Motion, the relevant briefing, and the remainder of the
record, the Court finds and ORDERS:
1. Expeditors Defendants’ Motion to Compel Discovery Responses from Plaintiff
(Dkt. #21) is GRANTED.
2. Plaintiff shall accomplish serving responses to the outstanding discovery no later than
fourteen (14) days from the date of this Order. Failure to comply with this Order
may result in sanctions being imposed, including dismissal of this action.
3. Expeditors’ request for attorneys’ fees and costs is GRANTED. Expeditors may file a

17

properly supported request for fees and costs no later than fourteen (14) days from the

18

date of this Order and no longer than four (4) pages. Any request shall be noted for

19

the second Friday after it is filed. No later than the Monday before the noting date,

20

Plaintiff may file a Response, no longer than four (4) pages, addressing only the

21
22
23

reasonableness of the fees and costs requested. No Reply is permitted.
DATED this 6 day of May 2019.

A

24
25

RICARDO S. MARTINEZ
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

26

ORDER – 3