Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_10-cv-01865/USCOURTS-cand-5_10-cv-01865-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 445
Nature of Suit: Americans with Disabilities Act - Employment
Cause of Action: 42:12101 Americans w/ Disabilities Act (ADA)

---

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

ORDER, page 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

JAMES SALSMAN,

Plaintiff,

v.

ACCESS SYSTEMS AMERICAS, INC.,

Defendant.

___________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: CV 10-01865 PSG

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S

MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY

[Re: Docket No. 54]

I. INTRODUCTION

On April 30, 2010 Plaintiff James Salsman (“Salsman”) filed this action against Defendant

Access Systems Americas, Inc. (“Access”) alleging employment discrimination in violation of the

Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C § 1201 et seq. On August 3, 2010, Defendant Access

Systems Americas, Inc., (“Access”) served Salsman with Access’s First Set of Interrogatories and

First Set of Requests for Production of Documents. To date, Salsman has not fully responded to

these requests, made any timely and legally sufficient objections, or moved to stay or quash

Access’s written discovery requests. 

On December 2, 2010, Access filed a motion to compel a response to its interrogatories

and to compel production of documents pursuant to Rule 37 of the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure. As the information sought appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of

Case 5:10-cv-01865-PSG Document 63 Filed 01/06/11 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

ORDER, page 2

admissible evidence and the motion is unopposed, Access’s motion is GRANTED.

II. BACKGROUND

Pursuant to FRCP 33 and 34, Access served interrogatories and a request to produce

documents upon Salsman on August 3, 2010. (Decl. of Anna T. Ferrari in Supp. of Def.’s Mot.

to Compel Disc. Exs. A, B). Salsman failed to respond by the September 7, 2010 deadline. The

parties conferred about responses to Access’s written discovery requests, but to no avail. Finally,

on November 15, 2010, Salsman stated that he would not be answering discovery because “the

discovery deadlines are tolled while my Appeal to the District Court is pending.” (Decl. Of Anna

T. Ferrari Ex. E.) To date, no notice of appeal has been filed. 

Having not received the requested documents almost three months after the initial deadline,

Access filed this motion to compel on December 2, 2010. Access has provided the required

certification that it has made a good faith effort to obtain this discovery without court action.

(Decl. Of Anna T. Ferrari ¶ 6). Salsman’s opposition was due December 21, 2010; none was

filed. On December 21, 2010, Salsman produced two email chains, which he indicated were a

“partial response to [Access’s] discovery request.” (Supplemental Decl. of Anna T. Ferrari in

Supp. of Def.’s Mot. To Compel Disc. Ex. 1).

III. STANDARDS

Under FRCP 33 and 34, a party answering interrogatories or a request for the production of

documents must provide a written response to each item requested within 30 days of service.

Fed.R.Civ.P. 33(b)(2), 34(b)(2). This response must include either a specific objection, an answer to

the interrogatory, or an agreement to produce each of the documents requested. Fed.R.Civ.P. 34(b)

(2)(A), (B). FRCP 37 grants judicial authority to compel disclosure where a party has failed to

provide authorized discovery in a timely fashion. A court may grant a motion to compel discovery

upon certification that the moving party has attempted in good faith to obtain the discovery without

court action. Fed. R. Civ. P 37(a)(1).

Case 5:10-cv-01865-PSG Document 63 Filed 01/06/11 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

ORDER, page 3

III. DISCUSSION

Access has provided sufficient documentation and certification that Salsman failed to

produce timely discovery as required by FRCP 33 and 34, and that it attempted to obtain the

requested discovery without court involvement. (Decl. Of Anna T. Ferrari ¶ 8-12, Exs C-E. ). As

Access’s requests appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, as

required by FRCP 26, and the motion is unopposed, the motion is granted.

V. CONCLUSION

Pursuant to Civ. L.R. 7-1(b), this motion may be determined without oral argument and

the hearing scheduled to be held on January 11, 2011 is vacated.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Salsman must respond to Access’s interrogatories and

must produce all requested documents no later than January 20, 2011.

Dated:

 

PAUL S. GREWAL

United States Magistrate Judge

January 6, 2011

Case 5:10-cv-01865-PSG Document 63 Filed 01/06/11 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

ORDER, page 4

Counsel automatically notified of this filing via the court’s Electronic Case Filing system.

copies mailed on 1/6/11 to:

James Price Salsman

1324 Carlton Ave

Menlo Park, CA 94025 

 /s/ Kelly Lowenberg for 

 OSCAR RIVERA

 Courtroom Deputy

Case 5:10-cv-01865-PSG Document 63 Filed 01/06/11 Page 4 of 4