From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

RAN v. INFINITE ENERGY, INC.

United States District Court, N.D. Florida, Gainesville Division
Jan 12, 2010
CASE NO. 1:07-cv-249-MMP-AK (N.D. Fla. Jan. 12, 2010)

Opinion

CASE NO. 1:07-cv-249-MMP-AK.

January 12, 2010


ORDER


This matter is before the Court on Doc. 131, Plaintiff's certification of good faith in attempting to resolve a discovery dispute (docketed by the Court as a "motion to produce"), Doc. 132, Plaintiff's motion to compel, and Doc. 137, Plaintiff's motion for extension of time to comply with the Court's Order, Doc. 130, directing Plaintiff to supplement her interrogatory answers and respond to Defendants' request for production of documents on or before January 15, 2010.

Docs. 131 and 132 both stem from Plaintiff's requests for information and documents pertaining to a Chinese-language voice recording that she made for Defendants' customer service operations while she was employed by Infinite Energy. Plaintiff requested that Defendants provide the recording itself, as well as any documents created in connection with the recording. In response, the individual Defendants state that they have no knowledge regarding the creation or deletion of the recording, and that Plaintiff is in the same or better position to know when and by whom the recording of her voice was made. Doc. 136. Defendants state that they have been unable to locate the actual recording, but are continuing to search records and computer data systems and will produce the recording if and when it is found. Id.

Upon careful consideration, the Court finds that Plaintiff's motions to produce/compel, Docs. 131 and 132, are not well-taken. Defendants have responded to Plaintiff's requests, and the fact that Plaintiff disagrees with Defendants' responses does not provide a basis for this Court to order any relief. Accordingly, the motions are DENIED.

In Doc. 137, Plaintiff alleges that she requires a 30-day extension of time to supplement her responses to Defendants' discovery requests "[d]ue to deep suffering from physical and mental pain, failure to get attorney help though I got some promise, yet again got declined. All in all, I am now very weak both physically and mentally." While the Court appreciates that engaging in litigation may be stressful, Plaintiff elected to file this civil suit and has an obligation to comply with the discovery rules, failing which her case is subject to being dismissed for failure to prosecute. Because Plaintiff is proceeding pro se, the Court will afford her one extension of time to comply with the Court's Order, Doc. 130. Accordingly, the motion, Doc. 137, is GRANTED. Plaintiff shall comply with the Court's Order, Doc. 130, on or before February 15, 2010. No further extensions shall be granted absent exigent circumstances. DONE AND ORDERED.


Summaries of

RAN v. INFINITE ENERGY, INC.

United States District Court, N.D. Florida, Gainesville Division
Jan 12, 2010
CASE NO. 1:07-cv-249-MMP-AK (N.D. Fla. Jan. 12, 2010)
Case details for

RAN v. INFINITE ENERGY, INC.

Case Details

Full title:RONG RAN, Plaintiff, v. INFINITE ENERGY, INC., et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, N.D. Florida, Gainesville Division

Date published: Jan 12, 2010

Citations

CASE NO. 1:07-cv-249-MMP-AK (N.D. Fla. Jan. 12, 2010)

Citing Cases

West v. Temple

The fact that Plaintiff disagrees with the content of some of Defendant's responses is not a ground for…

Upshaw v. McLaughlin

Plaintiff's speculation that "Counsel is withholding discovery material" is not a sufficient reason to compel…