Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Heleva v. Kunkle

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA


February 20, 2007

DANIEL A. HELEVA, PLAINTIFF
v.
SANDRA KUNKLE, ET AL., DEFENDANTS

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge Conner

ORDER

AND NOW, this 20th day of February, 2007, upon consideration of pro se plaintiff's motion to compel discovery*fn1 (Doc. 106), and it appearing that the discovery deadline was August 15, 2005 (see Doc. 50 ¶ 1.a), that plaintiff did not request an extension of this deadline (see Doc. 105 at 2 n.1), see FED. R. CIV. P. 6(b)(2) ("[When] an act is required or allowed to be done at or within a specified time, the court for cause shown may . . . upon motion made after the expiration of the specified period permit the act to be done where the failure to act was the result of excusable neglect . . . ."); see also In re Cendant Corp. Prides Litig., 233 F.3d 188, 196 (3d Cir. 2000) (discussing factors to assess in determining excusable neglect), that plaintiff has not averred any reason for his belated discovery requests, see id. (stating that the reason for the delay is a factor to consider), and that plaintiff did not comply with the order of court dated June 26, 2006 specifically directing that "[a]ny future motions regarding discovery issues, including a motion to compel, shall address the extensive delay in seeking discovery" (Doc. 105 at 2 n.1),*fn2 it is hereby ORDERED that plaintiff's motion to compel discovery (Doc. 106) is DENIED.

CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER United States District Judge


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.