UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

NORTHERN DIVISION

JANET SCHATZER, 

Plaintiff,

Case Number 09-11080-BC

v. Honorable Thomas L. Ludington

BAY CITY PUBLIC SCHOOLS, 

Defendant.

______________________________________/

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPEL AND EXTENDING CASE

MANAGEMENT SCHEDULE

Plaintiff Janet Schatzer’s complaint, alleging employment discrimination under state and

federal law, was removed from state court to this Court on March 23, 2009. A case management

and scheduling order was issued on May 12, 2009. Following a telephone status conference held

on August 25, 2009, the Court amended the scheduling order to provide more time for discovery and

trial preparation. [Dkt. # 8]. Now before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion to compel discovery and

amend the case management and scheduling order. [Dkt. # 9]. The motion was filed on October

14, 2009, and the time to respond has elapsed. Defendant Bay City Public Schools did not respond

to the motion.

Plaintiff’s motion asks the Court to direct Defendant’s responses to Plaintiff’s first set of

interrogatories, served on March 10, 2009, and second set of interrogatories, served on August 27,

2009. Defendant did not respond to either set of interrogatories. Pursuant to the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure, any party may serve on any other party twenty-five interrogatories, or more with

the Court’s permission. Fed. R. Civ. P. 33(a). The party who receives the interrogatories must

1:09-cv-11080-TLL-CEB Doc # 10 Filed 11/03/09 Pg 1 of 3 Pg ID 69
-2-

answer them within thirty days or serve specific objections and explain why it did not respond. Fed.

R. Civ. P. 33(b)(2), (4). Accordingly, Defendant’s responses are overdue. 

Even though Plaintiff has served Defendant with more than the twenty-five interrogatories

permitted by the rule, Defendant did not respond to any of the interrogatories or file opposition to

Plaintiff’s motion to compel. Moreover, depending on how the discreet subparts of Plaintiff’s

interrogatories are counted, the number of interrogatories only exceeds the limit by a few questions.

Consequently, the Court will direct Defendant to respond to all of Plaintiff’s interrogatories within

two weeks.

Plaintiff has also asked the Court to direct Defendant’s response to Plaintiff’s first set of

requests for document production. The requests were served on Defendant on March 10, 2009 and

Plaintiff has not received any response. The Federal Rules obligated Defendant to respond or object

by mid-April 2009, consequently, the Defendant’s responses are six months overdue. Fed. R. Civ.

P. 34(b)(2). Defendant will be directed to produce all requested documents within two weeks. 

Finally, Plaintiff has asked the Court to extend discovery and push back the other scheduling

dates. Discovery was scheduled to end on October 30, 2009. Because Defendant did not respond

to Plaintiff’s discovery requests, that deadline has passed without the completion of discovery.

Consequently, the Court will extend the scheduled dates sixty days. 

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion to compel discovery and extend the

scheduling order [Dkt. # 9] is GRANTED.

it is further ORDERED that Defendant is DIRECTED to respond to each of Plaintiff’s

interrogatories by November 16, 2009. 

1:09-cv-11080-TLL-CEB Doc # 10 Filed 11/03/09 Pg 2 of 3 Pg ID 70
-3-

It is further ORDERED that Defendant is DIRECTED to provide each of the requested

documents by November 16, 2009. 

It is further ORDERED that the case management and scheduling order is AMENDED as

follows: 

• Pretrial Disclosures Due: April 14, 2010

• Discovery Cutoff: January 4, 2010 

• Motions Challenging Experts Filed By: March 5, 2010

• Dispositive Motions Filed By: March 5, 2010

• Motions In Limine Filed By: April 30, 2010

• Final Pretrial Order and Jury Instructions Due: May 26, 2010

• Final Pretrial Conference: June 2, 2010 at 2:30 p.m.

• Trial Date: June 15, 2010 at 8:30 a.m. 

s/Thomas L. Ludington 

THOMAS L. LUDINGTON

United States District Judge

Dated: November 3, 2009

PROOF OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served

upon each attorney or party of record herein by electronic means or first

class U.S. mail on November 3, 2009.

s/Tracy A. Jacobs 

TRACY A. JACOBS

1:09-cv-11080-TLL-CEB Doc # 10 Filed 11/03/09 Pg 3 of 3 Pg ID 71