Free Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Kim Michael Cook, Plaintiff, vs. Dr. Robertson, et al., Defendants.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. CV-03-1100-PHX-ROS (VAM) ORDER

This matter arises on Plaintiff's Motion to Allow Interrogatories to Dr. Quan. (docket # 72) Defendants oppose the Motion. (dockets # 83, # 92) For the reasons articulated below, the Court will deny Plaintiff's Motion. As an initial matter, Plaintiff's discovery motion is untimely. The May 24, 2006 Scheduling Order established August 14, 2006 as the deadline for submitting discovery requests. (docket # 47) Plaintiff filed the instant motion nearly five months after the expiration of that deadline and fails to establish cause for his failure to file a timely motion. Moreover, even if Plaintiff's motion were timely, because Dr. Quan is not a party to this matter, he cannot be served with interrogatories. Fed.R.Civ.P. 33(a). Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 33(a) provides that "any party may serve upon any other party written interrogatories. . . ." Fed.R.Civ.P. 33(a)(emphasis added). On its face, Rule 33(a) is limited to parties and courts have recognized that interrogatories cannot be served on a nonparty. Francis v. Bryant, No. CV F 04 5077 REC SMS P, 2006 WL 947771, * 1 (E.D.Cal., April 12, 2006)(stating that requests for admissions cannot be served on a nonparty); Halpin v.
Case 2:03-cv-01100-ROS-MHB Document 101 Filed 02/07/2007 Page 1 of 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Cummings, No. 01-3188-MLB, 2005 WL 2099546, * 6 (D.Kan., August 29, 2005)(denying pro se plaintiff's motion to compel nonparties to respond to interrogatories, production requests and requests for admissions.) Because Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 33(a) does not permit the service of interrogatories on nonparties, the Court will deny Plaintiff's motion. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion to Allow Interrogatories to Dr. Quan (docket # 72) is DENIED. DATED this 6th day of February, 2007.

Case 2:03-cv-01100-ROS-MHB

-2Document 101

Filed 02/07/2007

Page 2 of 2