Free Memorandum in Opposition to Motion - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

Case 3:00-cv-00678-SRU

Document 57

Filed 06/14/2004

Page 1 of 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT _______________________________ O'KEEFE & ASSOCIATES, INC. v. Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 3:00-CV-678 (SRU)

THEME CO-OP PROMOTIONS, INC. Defendant. _______________________________ JUNE 14, 2004

DEFENDANT'S MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL Defendant objects to Plaintiff's Motion to Compel dated May 25, 2004. Defendant has fully complied with all of plaintiff's outstanding discovery requests. At the precise time that plaintiff was in the process of filing its Motion to Compel, defendant was in the process of providing documents and interrogatory responses in response to plaintiff's second and third discovery requests. While plaintiff correctly states that counsel for the parties traded telephone messages, plaintiff filed the Motion to Compel apparently unaware that the responses were being provided at the same time. On April 21, 2004, defendant produced nearly all of the documents responsive to plaintiff's second and third discovery requests. On May 24, 2004, counsel for the defendant produced additional documents to the plaintiff, and responded to a number of questions the plaintiff had raised in prior correspondence. A copy of the undersigned's letter to plaintiff's counsel is attached hereto as Exhibit A. As of those dates, defendant had fully complied with the outstanding document requests, and to date has now produced more than 3,000 pages of

Case 3:00-cv-00678-SRU

Document 57

Filed 06/14/2004

Page 2 of 3

documents to plaintiff. In the May 24, 2004 letter, the undersigned notified plaintiff's counsel that the interrogatory responses would be forthcoming. On May 26, 2004, defendant served on plaintiff responses to its second and third sets of interrogatories. See, exhibits B and C, respectively. Therefore, as of that date, defendant had fully complied with all of the outstanding document requests and interrogatories that are the subject of the Motion to Compel. On May 27, 2004, the undersigned received the Plaintiff's Motion to Compel. The undersigned promptly sent a letter to plaintiff's counsel requesting that plaintiff withdraw the Motion to Compel, presuming that defendant's interrogatory responses had crossed in the mail with plaintiff's motion.See, exhibits D. To defendant's knowledge, plaintiff has not yet withdrawn the Motion to Compel. Defendant has now fully complied with all outstanding interrogatories and document requests. There is therefore no basis for the Motion to Compel, which should be denied. THE DEFENDANT, THEME CO-OP PROMOTIONS, INC. By_____________________________ David A. Ball, Esq. Fed. Bar No. ct10154 Cohen and Wolf, P.C. 1115 Broad Street Bridgeport, CT 06604 Tel. No. (203) 368-0211

2

Case 3:00-cv-00678-SRU

Document 57

Filed 06/14/2004

Page 3 of 3

CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that on this 14th day of June, 2004, a copy of the foregoing Memorandum was mailed via First Class Mail, postage prepaid, to the following: Francis D. Burke, Esq. Mangines & Burke LLC 1115 Main Street Suite 708 Bridgeport, CT 06604 ____________________________ David A. Ball, Esq.

3