Peters

United States v. Peters

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMarch 20, 20252:24-cv-00287California2,672 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 2:24-cv-00287-WBS-CKD Plaintiff, v. ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO

COMPEL

MATTHEW H. PETERS, et al., Defendant. (ECF No. 66)

17 Plaintiff United States of America moves to compel defendant Matthew Peters to respond to plaintiff’s interrogatories, requests for production, and requests for admission.1 (ECF No. 66.) Pursuant to Local Rule 251(e), plaintiff’s motion was excepted from the requirement for Joint Statements re Discovery Disagreement and was set for hearing on March 5, 2025. See E.D. Cal. L.R. 251(e); ECF No. 66. On the Court’s own motion, the hearing was reset for March 19, 2025. (ECF No. 67.) Although defendant’s response to the motion to compel was due March 12, 2025, he failed to file a response. See E.D. Cal. L.R. 251(e); Docket. On March 19, 2025, the Court held a hearing via Zoom. (ECF No. 70.) Attorneys Steven Tennyson and David Thiess appeared for plaintiff. Attorney…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.