Olick v. Lily

Full title: DAVID R. OLICK, Plaintiff, v. VIVIAN LILY, Defendant.

Court: United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California

Date published: Jul 31, 2015

2:15-cv-0410 WBS DAD (E.D. Cal. Jul. 31, 2015)

Opinion

DAVID R. OLICK, Plaintiff, v. VIVIAN LILY, Defendant. No. 2:15-cv-0410 WBS DAD United States District Court, E.D. California. July 31, 2015

          ORDER

          DALE A. DROZD, Magistrate Judge.

         On July 31, 2015, this matter came before the undersigned for hearing of plaintiff's motion for discovery sanctions. Attorney David Olick appeared telephonically on his own behalf. Attorney Stephen Ruehmann appeared telephonically and attorney William Murray appeared in person on behalf of the defendant.

         Upon consideration of the arguments on file and at the hearing, and for the reasons set forth on the record at the hearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

         1. To the extent plaintiff's motion for discovery sanctions seeks an order striking defendant's answer, plaintiff's motion (Dkt. No. 15) is denied; and

         2. To the extent plaintiff's motion for discovery sanctions seeks an order requiring defendant's compliance with a prior discovery order, plaintiff's motion (Dkt. No. 15) is denied as untimely and without prejudice to plaintiff seeking an order reopening discovery from the assigned District Judge.