U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, REGION IV, ATLANTA, GEORGIA, KAROL SMITH & EPA INSPECTOR GENERAL,
Respondents
ORDER DENYING RESPONDENT OIG'S MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY
Respondent OIG served Complainant with discovery requests on October 19, 2001. Complainant responded on December 10, 2001. On December 31, 2001, Respondent OIG sent Complainant a letter explaining the deficiencies in Complainant's Responses and requested Complainant to cure the deficiencies by January 15, 2002, the cut-off date to complete all discovery. When Complainant did not comply, Respondent OIG filed a Motion for a Protective Order on January 18, 2002.
On a December 13, 2001, telephone conference call I specifically admonished the parties concerning the end of discovery and stated that "as we approached the [January 15, 2002] deadline that's going to be it. I'm going to expect everybody to have transferred whatever they need." (Telephone Conference Call Transcript, p. 22, December 13, 2001).
Under 29 C.F.R. § 18.6 (2001), a party had ten days to respond after service of a motion. By filing a Motion to Compel on January 18, 2002, after the cut-off of discovery, Respondent OIG cannot have allowed enough time for a properly filed response before the end of discovery. As such Respondent OIG's Motion to Compel is untimely and in direct violation of my admonishment not to wait until the last moment. Accordingly, Respondent OIG's Motion to Compel Discovery is DENIED.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Respondent OIG's Motion to Compel Discovery is DENIED.
