Somero Enterprises, Inc. v. Stoltzfus, 2:18-cv-161-FtM-29CM. (2018)
Court: District Court, M.D. Florida
Number: infdco20180822a32
Visitors: 2
Filed: Aug. 21, 2018
Latest Update: Aug. 21, 2018
Summary: ORDER CAROL MIRANDO , Magistrate Judge . This matter comes before the Court upon review of Defendant/Counterclaimant Daniel R. Stoltzfus' Motion to Compel Production of Documents to Plaintiff/Counterdefendant Somero Enterprises, Inc. filed on August 17, 2018. Doc. 43. For the reasons stated below, the motion is denied without prejudice. Defendant seeks to compel Plaintiff to produce of documents responsive to the requests for production served on June 27, 2018. Doc. 43 at 1. The Local Rul
Summary: ORDER CAROL MIRANDO , Magistrate Judge . This matter comes before the Court upon review of Defendant/Counterclaimant Daniel R. Stoltzfus' Motion to Compel Production of Documents to Plaintiff/Counterdefendant Somero Enterprises, Inc. filed on August 17, 2018. Doc. 43. For the reasons stated below, the motion is denied without prejudice. Defendant seeks to compel Plaintiff to produce of documents responsive to the requests for production served on June 27, 2018. Doc. 43 at 1. The Local Rule..
More
ORDER
CAROL MIRANDO, Magistrate Judge.
This matter comes before the Court upon review of Defendant/Counterclaimant Daniel R. Stoltzfus' Motion to Compel Production of Documents to Plaintiff/Counterdefendant Somero Enterprises, Inc. filed on August 17, 2018. Doc. 43. For the reasons stated below, the motion is denied without prejudice.
Defendant seeks to compel Plaintiff to produce of documents responsive to the requests for production served on June 27, 2018. Doc. 43 at 1. The Local Rule 3.01(g) certification states that Defendant attempted to contact Plaintiff three times by email but has not received a response. Id. at 2. Local Rule 3.01(g) requires that each motion filed in a civil case, with certain enumerated exceptions not at issue here, contain a statement "stating whether counsel agree on the resolution of the motion," and further provides that a statement to the effect that counsel for the moving party attempted to confer with counsel for the opposing party but counsel was unavailable is "insufficient to satisfy the parties' obligation to confer." M.D. Fla. R. 3.01(g).
ACCORDINGLY, it is
ORDERED:
Defendant/Counterclaimant Daniel R. Stoltzfus' Motion to Compel Production of Documents to Plaintiff/Counterdefendant Somero Enterprises, Inc. (Doc. 43) is DENIED without prejudice.
DONE and ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
