The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gladys Kessler United States District Judge
Defendant, PEPCO, has filed a Motion for an Order to Show Cause why Plaintiff's counsel, Nathaniel Johnson, should not be sanctioned, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(c). Upon consideration of the Motion, the Response, the Reply, the record in this case, and the applicable case law, the Court concludes that the Motion should be denied.
A fairly detailed chronology of events is necessary in order to fully understand the Court's ruling.
June 4, 2009: The Complaint is filed.
January 14, 2011: Discovery was scheduled to close.
Plaintiff requested Defendant's consent for a 30-day extension of the discovery deadline; Defendant agreed; Plaintiff failed to make a timely motion and on January 5, 2011, Defendant filed a Motion for Enlargement of Time.
January 6, 2011: The Motion was granted; discovery was set to close on February 14, 2011, and a Status Conference was set for February 16, 2011.
January 31, 2011: Plaintiff moved to enlarge the period of discovery to March 15, 2011 indicating that he "anticipated I will depose up to four witnesses." Pl.'s Mot. at 1, n. 1.
February 1, 2011: PEPCO opposed the Motion.
February 7, 2011: Plaintiff replied to Defendant's opposition.
February 15, 2011: Plaintiff's counsel notified PEPCO and the Court that he could not attend the Status Conference scheduled for February 16, 2011 because of illness and requested a continuance which was granted. The Status Conference was continued to February 23, 2011.
February 23, 2011: At the rescheduled Status Conference, the Court granted Plaintiff's January 31, 2011 Motion to Enlarge the discovery period until March 15, 2011.
February 25, 2011: Plaintiff's counsel asked Defendant to identify available dates and times for the depositions of two of its employees. PEPCO's counsel responded immediately stating that she hoped to have a response by Monday, February 28, 2011.
February 28, 2011: The scheduled deposition of Dr. Michael Rose, Ph.D., Plaintiff's treating psychologist, went forward as ordered by the Court. Plaintiff's counsel did not appear at the deposition, but ...