Nagle
Nagle v. York
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION 7 DAVID F. NAGLE, Case No. 20-cv-08482-VKD
Plaintiff,
ORDER RE OCTOBER 1, 2021
v. DISCOVERY DISPUTE
THOMAS A. YORK, et al., Re: Dkt. No. 26 Defendants.
13 Plaintiff David Nagle and defendants Thomas York and Advance Management LLC ask the Court to resolve a dispute concerning Mr. York’s failure timely to respond to Mr. Nagle’s requests for admissions (“RFAs”). The Court finds the matter suitable for resolution without oral argument. Civil L.R. 7-1(b). For the reasons explained below, the Court concludes that Mr. York did not timely respond to Mr. Nagle’s RFAs, which are deemed admitted for purposes of Rule 36(a)(3), subject to further proceedings as set forth below. I. BACKGROUND On April 26, 2021, Mr. Nagle served several RFAs on Mr. York. Dkt. No. 26, Ex. A. Mr. York did not respond to the RFAs within 30 days. The parties did not stipulate to extend the 24 …