MEMORANDUM

DALE S. FISCHER, District Judge.

Plaintiff twice moved for default judgment against Defendants in this case. The first time, the motion was denied, in part, because Plaintiff had not alleged that the removal of the architectural barriers in question was readily achievable. Plaintiff then filed a second motion for default judgment that was word-for-word identical to the first and provided no consideration to any of the points made in the Court's extensive order denying the first motion. Plaintiff's counsel was then ordered to show cause why they should not be sanctioned for their behavior. Counsel's response is basically that they disagree with the Court's position as to whether Plaintiff needs to plead that the barriers are readily achievable and that filing a duplicative motion was, for some unfathomable reason, "was the only avenue with which Plaintiff could pursue his case."1 (Price Decl. ¶ 7.) Why Plaintiff could not have simply agreed to dismissal of the case with a reservation of a right to appeal the Court's denial of default judgment after the first motion and what was to be gained by the second motion is not explained.

As Plaintiff's counsel admits that it cannot meet the Court's standard for a default

MEMORANDUM

JS 6 judgment in this case, the case is dismissed without prejudice. The Court finds that sanctions are appropriate both because a duplicative motion wastes Court resources, but also because filing an identical motion to one already denied at least suggests a hope that the Court will not notice that nothing has changed and will inadvertently grant the motion. Plaintiff's counsel is sanctioned in the amount of $500. Sanctions must be paid to the clerk of the court no later than December 7, 2015.

IT IS SO ORDERED.