IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
May 17, 2006
DONYALDE SHERROD, PLAINTIFF,
SOUTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY, DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Proud, Magistrate Judge
Before the Court is defendant's Motion to Compel. (Doc. 35). Plaintiff has not responded to the motion, and the time for doing so has now expired. The Court deems the failure to respond to be an admission of the merits of the motion. SDIL-LR 7.1(g).
Defendant served interrogatories and requests for production on plaintiff's counsel in May, 2005. Copies of the discovery requests are attached to the motion. Plaintiff has not responded to the discovery requests.
Plaintiff is now proceeding pro se. At her deposition, taken while she was still represented by counsel, there was a discussion regarding the fact that there were outstanding discovery requests to which she would have to respond. See, Exhibit 3, attached to Doc. 35.
Plaintiff must participate in discovery if this case is going to proceed. The Court hereby warns plaintiff that she will be subject to sanctions, which may include monetary sanctions and/or dismissal of this case, if she fails to comply with this order or to make timely responses to discovery requests in the future.
Upon consideration and for good cause shown, defendant's Motion to Compel (Doc. 35) is GRANTED. Plaintiff shall answer defendant's interrogatories and produce the requested documents by June 1, 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.