Johnson v. Mai

Background

Scott Johnson filed a discovery-dispute letter asking the court to compel defendants Chi Mai, Kim Hang Thi Bui, and Hong Thuy Thi Hoang to respond to interrogatories and requests for documents. The opinion states that the defendants were representing themselves. Johnson said he filed the letter alone because he could not obtain their cooperation in the joint discovery-dispute process required by the court’s standing order.

The court had ordered the defendants to respond to Johnson’s letter by August 14, 2020. They did not comply. Instead, they filed a copy of the court’s order containing the handwritten statement: “I do not accept this offer to contract and I do not consent to these proceedings.” Johnson represented that he had served the discovery requests on February 27, 2020, but the opinion notes that he provided no proof of service. He also represented that the responses were approximately one month overdue as of August 6, 2020.

Ruling on the Motion to Compel

The court granted Johnson’s motion to compel responses under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(a). Because the defendants offered no explanation for failing to respond, the court ordered them to answer the interrogatories and document requests at issue. The court also ruled that any objections the defendants might have had were waived because they did not make them within the required time, citing Rules 33(b)(4) and 34(b)(2)(A).

Fees and Possible Sanctions

The court explained that, after granting a motion to compel and giving the affected party an opportunity to be heard, it generally must require the party whose conduct caused the motion to pay the moving party’s reasonable expenses, including attorney fees. Johnson requested sanctions, but he had not provided information about the fees and costs incurred in preparing and filing the motion.

The court therefore ordered Johnson to file an application for those fees and costs by September 3, 2020, with enough information to allow the court to assess whether the requested amounts were reasonable. It also ordered the defendants to show cause in writing by September 17, 2020, why they should not be required to pay Johnson’s reasonable fees and costs. The defendants could request a hearing; otherwise, the court would decide the sanctions issue without oral argument. Magistrate Judge Virginia K. Demarchi did not award a specific amount of fees or costs in this order.