Matlock v. Safeco Insurance Company of America, No. 4:2009cv00506 - Document 32 (N.D. Okla. 2010)
Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER by Magistrate Judge Frank H McCarthy, directing Plaintiff to show cause( Response to Order to Show Cause due by 6/1/2010) (jcm, Dpty Clk)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA MICHAEL MATLOCK, Plaintiff, vs. Case No. 09-CV-506-GKF-FHM SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, Defendant. OPINION AND ORDER On March 8, 2010, the Court issued an order in which Plaintiff was ordered to supply to Defendant information that is responsive to Interrogatory Nos. 9 and 10 and to do so on or before March 29, 2010. [Dkt. 27]. Defendant filed a notice to advise that as of April 12, 2010, Plaintiff has not complied with the Order. [Dkt. 29]. Plaintiff has not filed any response to Defendant s notice. Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(b)(2) any one of a variety of sanctions may be imposed when a party fails to obey a discovery order. Plaintiff is HEREBY ORDERED to file a brief to show cause why he should not be sanctioned for failure to obey the March 8, 2010 discovery order. The brief should advise the Court of the reasons for Plaintiff s failure to obey the order and should also advise the Court what efforts have been taken to comply. Plaintiff is advised that merely supplying the ordered discovery will not satisfy the obligations under this order. Plaintiff is further advised that a failure to comply with the instant order may result in sanctions that may include a recommendation that the case be dismissed. The brief required by this order is due on or before June 1. 2010. SO ORDERED this 11th day of May, 2010.
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
