IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
May 12, 2006
BRUCE CLARRY, PLAINTIFF,
EDWARD EYTALIS, AND NOVA J. CLARRY, DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Proud, Magistrate Judge
Before the Court is defendants' Motion to Compel. (Doc. 66).
Defendants assert that the pro se plaintiff has failed to respond to their discovery requests and to serve his Rule 26 initial disclosures. Plaintiff has not responded to the motion and the time for doing so has expired. The Court deems the failure to respond to be an admission of the merits of the motion. SDIL-LR 7.1(g).
Plaintiff must participate in discovery if this case is going to proceed. The Court hereby warns plaintiff that he will be subject to sanctions, which may include monetary sanctions and/or dismissal of this case, if he fails to comply with this order or to make timely responses to discovery requests in the future.
Upon consideration and for good cause shown, defendants' Motion to Compel. (Doc. 66) is GRANTED. Plaintiff is ordered to serve his initial disclosures and answers to defendants' interrogatories and to produce all documents requested by defendants on or before May 19, 2006. Failure to do so will result in sanctions, as set forth above.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
CLIFFORD J. PROUD UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
© 1992-2006 VersusLaw Inc.