govinfo:USCOURTS-tnwd-1_23-cv-01217-2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT  
WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE 
EASTERN DIVISION 
 
 
MICHAEL ROBINSON, 
 
Plaintiff, 
) 
) 
) 
) 
) 
) 
 
 
 
  
v. ) No. 1:23-cv-01217-SHM-tmp 
 ) 
) 
) 
) 
) 
 
DAVID HININGER, ET AL., 
  
Defendants. 
 
 
  
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO COMPEL 
 
 Before the Court is Defendant Tasma Robertson’s January 6, 
2025 Motion to Compel. (ECF No. 18.) Pro se Plaintiff Michael 
Robinson has not responded. 
 On October 15, 2024, Defendant mailed Interrogatories and 
Requests for Production of Documents to Plaintiff, who is pro se 
and incarcerated at the Whiteville Correctional Facility. (ECF 
No. 18-1.) When Plaintiff did not respond, Defendant sent a 
follow up letter on December 18, 2024. (ECF No. 18-3.) As of the 
filing of Defendant’s motion, no response to that letter had 
been received. (ECF No. 18-1.)  The Court has received no 
notification that Plaintiff has complied with Defendant’s 
interrogatories and requests for production. 
  
Case 1:23-cv-01217-SHM-tmp     Document 21     Filed 08/21/25     Page 1 of 3      PageID
<pageID>
2 
 
Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37, “[a] party seeking 
discovery may move for an order compelling an answer, 
designation, production, or inspection” if “a party fails to 
answer an interrogatory submitted under Rule 33; or a party fails 
to produce documents or fails to respond that inspection will be 
permitted——or fails to permit inspection——as requested under 
Rule 34.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(3)(B)(iii)-(iv).  
 Defendant seeks an order from the Court: (1) compelling 
Plaintiff to provide complete and proper responses to Defendant 
Robertson’s Interrogatories and Requests for Production of 
Documents, (2) assessing the Defendant’s costs incurred in making 
its Motion to Compel, and (3) warning Plaintiff that if he fails 
to provide complete and proper responses on or before a certain 
date, his lawsuit will be dismissed. (ECF No. 18-1.) 
 Defendant’s Motion to Compel is GRANTED. Plaintiff Michael 
Robinson is ORDERED to respond to Defendant Robertson’s 
Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents within 
21 days, on or before Thursday, September 11, 2025.
1  
Failure to comply with this Order and the discovery process 
may result in sanctions up to an including dismissal of this 
action. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(b). At this time, the Court 
 
1 Defendant attached to her motion a copy of her interrogatories and requests 
for production of documents, which the Court will mail with this Order. 
Case 1:23-cv-01217-SHM-tmp     Document 21     Filed 08/21/25     Page 2 of 3      PageID
<pageID>
3 
 
concludes that an award of costs against the pro se prisoner 
would not be in the interest of justice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 
37(a)(5)(A)(iii). 
SO ORDERED this  21st  day of August, 2025. 
/s/ Samuel H. Mays, Jr. 
          SAMUEL H. MAYS, JR.  
          UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 
Case 1:23-cv-01217-SHM-tmp     Document 21     Filed 08/21/25     Page 3 of 3      PageID
<pageID>

Passage view · GavelSight