Case Information
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE WESTERN DIVISION GREGORY JONES, )
) Plaintiff, ) )
v. )
) No. 24-cv-2952-TLP-tmp AMERISAVE MORTGAGE )
CORPORATION and FREEDOM )
MORTGAGE CORPORATION, )
)
Defendants. ) ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY
Before the court is pro se plaintiff Gregory Jones’s Motion to Compel Discovery, filed on February 14, 2025. [1] (ECF No. 35.) Citing Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26, Jones moves the court for an order compelling defendants AmeriSave Mortgage Corporation ( AmeriSave ) and Freedom Mortgage Corporation ( Freedom Mortgage ) to produce complete and authenticated original documents. (Id. at PageID 458.) He appears to reference documents attached in support of AmeriSave s first Motion to Dismiss, [2] (ECF No. 29), which Jones argues are “ incomplete, altered, and lacking proper authentication, ” (ECF No. 35 at PageID 458.) Jones contends that by submitting incomplete and altered records, defendants have failed to provide their initial disclosures as required by Rule 26(a)(1)(A). (Id. at PageID 459.)
The court finds Jones ’ s arguments unavailing. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a) instructs that “[a] party must make [its] initial disclosures at or within 14 days after the parties’ Rule 26(f) conference unless a different time is set by stipulation or court order. ” Fed. R. Civ. P. 26( a)(C). Here, because the court has not held a scheduling conference or entered a scheduling order pending its resolution of AmeriSave ’ s Motions to Dismiss, the parties have not yet conferred pursuant to Rule 26(f). (See ECF No. 51 (recommending that AmeriSave ’ s Second Motion to Dismiss be granted by report and recommendation dated August 1, 2025).) Therefore, the deadline for defendants ’ initial disclosures has not passed, and Jones s Motion to Compel Discovery is premature. The court accordingly DENIES the motion on that basis.
IT IS SO ORDERED. Jones’s Third Amended Complaint. (ECF No. 51 at PageID 554); ( see ECF Nos. 36, 42.) Jones asserts in his motion that [t]he Defendants submitted five
or six . . . pages into the record. (ECF No. 35 at PageID 458.) The court notes, however, that Freedom Mortgage has yet to appear in this action, let alone submit any documents into the record.
s/Tu M. Pham TU M. PHAM Chief United States Magistrate Judge August 5, 2025 Date
[1] Pursuant to Administrative Order No. 2013-05, this case has been referred to the United States magistrate judge for management of all pretrial matters for determination or report and recommendation, as appropriate.
[2] The undersigned entered a report and recommendation on August 1, 2025, recommending that AmeriSave’s first Motion to Dismiss be denied as moot in light of AmeriSave’s subsequent Motion to Dismiss