*1 This case comes before the Court on Plaintiff One Step Up, Ltd.’s Motion to Compel and for Sanctions [196]. Defendants James L. McMillin, Sr. and James L. McMillin, Jr. have filed no response opposing Plaintiff's Motion, and the period allowed for response has expired. See LR 7.1B, NDGa. Accordingly, Plaintiff's Motion is deemed unopposed. Id. For the reasons detailed below, Plaintiff's unopposed Motion is GRANTED.

On March 17, 2021, Plaintiff served Defendants McMillin Sr., McMillin Jr., and Ed Cagle with interrogatories and requests for production of documents in aid of execution of the judgment issued by this Court. Defendants’ written responses were due by April 16, 2021. Ed Cagle responded to the discovery requests, indicating that nothing had changed since his earlier discovery responses. Neither McMillin Sr. nor McMillin Jr. provided any responses or objections to Plaintiff's discovery requests.

After Defendants’ response deadline passed, Plaintiff's counsel attempted to confer with counsel for Defendants McMillin Sr. and McMillin Jr. Specifically, Plaintiff's counsel contacted Defendants’ counsel at least three separate times regarding the status of Defendants’ discovery responses, and agreed to several short extensions for the production of those responses. Nevertheless, Defendants McMillin Sr. and McMillin Jr. still failed to provide any written responses to Plaintiff's discovery requests, so Plaintiff filed this Motion to Compel and for Sanctions on May 11, 2021. To date, Defendants McMillin Sr. and McMillin Jr. have yet to provide any written response to Plaintiff's discovery requests or to respond to Plaintiff's Motion.

I. Relevant Law

Rule 37 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedures permits a party to “move for an order compelling disclosure or discovery.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(1). A party may file such a motion, for example, if the party from whom discovery is requested fails to answer an interrogatory or to respond to a request for production. Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(3)(B)(iii)-(iv).

“The party resisting discovery bears the burden of showing the discovery requests to be improper, unreasonable, or burdensome.” Friday v. Sallie Mae, Inc., 2014 WL 12860394, at *1 (N.D. Ga. Nov. 20, 2014) (citing Panola Land Buyers Ass'n v. Shuman, 762 F.2d 1550, 1559 (11th Cir. 1985)). Any objections to an interrogatory or request for production may be deemed waived if not raised in a timely manner. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 33(b)(4); Scruggs v. Int'l Paper Co., 278 F.R.D. 698, 700 n.4 (S.D. Ga. 2012).

II. Motion to Compel and for Sanctions

Plaintiff argues that Defendants McMillin Sr. and McMillin Jr. should be compelled to provide full and complete answers to its interrogatories and written responses and documents to its requests for production. (Mot. to Compel and for Sanctions, Dkt. [196], at 1-2, 5.) Plaintiff also moves for the imposition of sanctions due to Defendants McMillin Sr. and McMillin Jr.’s refusal to provide responses, including an award of its attorneys’ fees incurred in bringing this Motion. (Id. at 1-2, 4-5.) As previously noted, Plaintiff's Motion is unopposed.

*2 Upon consideration, Plaintiff's unopposed Motion to Compel is GRANTED. Any objections Defendants McMillin Sr. and McMillin Jr. may have had to Plaintiff's interrogatories or requests for production have been waived by their failure to provide any response within the applicable time frame. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 33(b)(4); Scruggs v. Int'l Paper Co., 278 F.R.D. at 700 n.4. Defendants McMillin Sr. and McMillin Jr. are hereby ORDERED to serve full and complete written answers to each of Plaintiff's interrogatories and written responses and documents responsive to each of Plaintiff's requests for production within fourteen days of entry of this Order. Defendants’ continued failure to respond will result in sanctions, including the possibility of contempt.

Further, Plaintiff's request for an award of attorneys’ fees is GRANTED. In the event a motion to compel is granted, Rule 37(a)(5)(A) provides that the Court must award the movant its reasonable expenses, including attorneys’ fees, incurred in making the motion, after giving an opportunity to be heard. But the Court must not award expenses if “the movant filed the motion before attempting in good faith to obtain the disclosure or discovery without court action”; “the opposing party's nondisclosure, response, or objection was substantially justified”; or “other circumstances make an award of expenses unjust.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(5)(A)(i)-(iii). The facts here justify an award of attorneys’ fees for Plaintiff. Defendants McMillin Sr. and McMillin Jr. had an opportunity to be heard on the issue of attorneys’ fees but failed to respond to Plaintiff's Motion. Plaintiff did not file its Motion until it attempted multiple times in good faith to obtain its requested discovery without court action. Defendants’ nondisclosure or failure to respond was not substantially justified, and no circumstances make an award of expenses unjust. Accordingly, Plaintiff shall have fourteen days from entry of this Order to provide the Court with a statement of costs and evidence it wishes the Court to consider regarding its attorneys’ fees in bringing the Motion to Compel. Defendants McMillin Sr. and McMillin Jr. shall then have seven days to file objections.

For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff One Step Up, Ltd.’s unopposed Motion to Compel and for Sanctions [196] is GRANTED. Defendants James L. McMillin, Sr. and James L. McMillin, Jr. are hereby ORDERED to serve upon Plaintiff, within fourteen days of entry of this Order, full and complete written answers to Plaintiff's interrogatories and written responses and documents responsive to Plaintiff's requests for production.

Plaintiff shall have fourteen days from entry of this Order to provide the Court with evidence it wishes the Court to consider regarding its attorneys’ fees in bringing the Motion to Compel. Defendants McMillin Sr. and McMillin Jr. shall then have seven days to object.

SO ORDERED this 15th day of June, 2021.