I would be very interested in knowing the local rules (perhaps I should go look). But a filing of a Motion to Dismiss accompanied by a Motion to Extend Discovery would, typically, obviate the need to respond in that 30 day window,
Having said that, politics aside, there is NO WAY on this planet a judge anywhere would rule against Obama based on a discovery technicality. No judge will rule that a major party candidate isn’t eligible because of a technical violation of a FRCP. If that were the case, than neither McCain nor Obama would be on the ballot in Texas.
It isn’t a “technicality” - as in “some trivial detail” - which is why a failure to respond is deemed to be an admission under the FRCP. It isn’t trivial, and no lawyer wants to go into a courtroom and try to explain how “the dog ate his homework,” particularly when compliance with teh discovery request is genuinely trivial, as it is in this case.
I do agree that no judge will do anything, but it is most likely because the courts have become corrupt and lawless, not because failure to observe the FRCP discovery rules is a mere “technicality”. The only legitimate way that O’s campaign could get away with this is if Berg lacks standing or the court lacks jurisdiction.
Only if done within the 30 day period. They waited.
If a judge doesn’t do it who will?
Maybe the 0 will be taken off of the ballot in PA. Can he win without PA?