Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-00854/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-00854-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Other Contract

---

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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

JENNA M ASSOLI p /k/a JENNA

JAMESON,

Plaintiff, 

vs.

REGAN MEDIA and JUDITH REGAN, an

individual,

Defendants.

REGAN MEDIA, INC., a New York

corporation, and JUDITH REGAN, an

individual,

Defendants/Count erclaimants,

vs.

JENNA M ASSOLI, p /k/a JENNA

JAMESON, an individual,

Plaintiff/Counterdefendant,

and

JAY GRDINA, an individual, and DOLCE

AMORE, INC., a Colorado corporation,

Counterdefendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CIV 05-0854-PHX-EHC

ORDER

Pending before the Court are Defendant/Counterclaimant Regan Media's Motion to

Compel [dkt. 68] and Second Motion to Compel and Request for Sanctions [dkt. 78]. The

Motions are fully briefed.

Case 2:05-cv-00854-EHC Document 102 Filed 05/23/06 Page 1 of 4
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

- 2 -

On January 5, 2006, Regan Media filed a M ot ion to Compel, seeking an order

comp elling Plaint iff/Count erdefendant and Count erdefendant s (collect ively ,

Count erdefendants) to respond to Regan Media's First Request for Production of

Documents, which was served on November 4, 2005, and awarding Regan Media its

exp enses and at t orney s' fees incurred in bringing the Motion to Compel.

Counterdefendants allege that they failed to respond because they were busy with

activities in the adult film industry. Counterdefendants agreed to resp ond to the Request

for Production wit hin 15 days of January 23, 2006 and to pay the costs and attorneys'

incurred by Regan Media in bringing t he M ot ion to Compel. [Dkt. 74, p. 4]. On February

9, 2006, Counterdefendants served their Response to the Request for Production.

On February 17, 2006, Regan M edia filed a Second Motion to Compel, alleging that

the Response to the Request for Production is incomplete and contains improper

objections. A "party upon whom the request [for production] is served shall serve a

written response within 30 days aft er t he service of the request." Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(b). The

Nint h Circuit has found "that a failure to object to discovery requests within the time

required constitutes a waiver of any objection." Richmark Corp . v. T imber Falling

Consultants, 959 F.2d 1468, 1473 (9th Cir. 1992) (objections waived where not raised in a

timely resp onse to the request for production). Here, the Request for Production was

served on Counterdefendants on November 4, 2005. Counterdefendants did not respond

to the Request for Production until February 9, 2006. Because their response was two

months late, Counterdefendants waived their objections to the Request for Production.

The Court will order Counterdefendants, pursuant to the Second Motion to Compel, to

respond fully and without objection to the Request for Production by May 31, 2006.

Counterdefendants argue that they have produced all documents responsive to a

number of the document requests. T he Court does not accept that argument because

Counterdefendants admit they have attended to their activities in the adult film industry

to the det riment of their obligation to participate in discovery in this case. Given that

Case 2:05-cv-00854-EHC Document 102 Filed 05/23/06 Page 2 of 4
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

- 3 -

history, Count erdefendants will be ordered to describe their efforts to find documents in

response to the Request for Production.

Count erdefendants failed to sign their Responses to Regan Media's First Set of

Interrogatories as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 33(b)(2). They will be ordered to do so.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that Defendant/Counterclaimant Regan Media's Motion to Compel

[dkt. 68] and Second Motion to Compel and Request for Sanctions [dkt. 78] are GRANTED

IN PART.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff/Counterdefendant and Counterdefendants

shall respond fully and without objection to Defendant/Counterclaimant Regan Media's

First Request for Production of Documents by May 31, 2006. The Response shall include

a description of their effort s t o find documents in response to the First Request for

Production of Documents.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff/Counterdefendant and Counterdefendants

shall sign their Responses to Defendant/Counterclaimant Regan Media's First Set of

Interrogatories by May 31, 2006.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff/Counterdefendant and Counterdefendants

shall pay, as agreed, Defendant/Counterclaimant Regan Media's reasonable expenses and

attorneys' fees incurred in filing the Motion to Compel.

//

//

//

//

//

//

//

//

Case 2:05-cv-00854-EHC Document 102 Filed 05/23/06 Page 3 of 4
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

- 4 -

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant/Count erclaimant Regan Media's request

for reasonable expenses and attorney s' fees incurred in filing the Second Motion to Compel

and Request for Sanctions is DENIED, without prejudice to reurging upon the filing of a

Supplemental Memorandum setting forth the reasonable expenses and attorneys' fees

incurred in filing the Second Motion to Compel and Request for Sanctions. If a

Supplemental Memorandum is filed, Plaintiff/Counterdefendant and Counterdefendants

may file a Responsive Memorandum within 10 days.

DATED this 22nd day of May, 2006.

Case 2:05-cv-00854-EHC Document 102 Filed 05/23/06 Page 4 of 4