ORDER ON MOTION FOR LEAVE TO SUBMIT LATE FILINGS

JAMES L. ROBART, District Judge.

Before the court is Plaintiff LifeGoals Corp.'s ("LifeGoals") motion for leave to submit two late filings: a response to Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff Advanced Hair Restoration LLC's ("AHR") motion for summary judgment (MSJ (Dkt. # 31)), and a response to AHR's motion to compel (MTC (Dkt. # 34)). (Mot. (Dkt. # 39).)

AHR filed a motion for summary judgment on October 26, 2017, and a motion to compel on November 2, 2017 (see MSJ; MTC); both motions noted on November 17, 2017 (see id.). Pursuant to the local rules, LifeGoals should have responded to both motions no later than Monday, November 13, 2017. See Local Rules W.D. Wash. LCR 7(d)(3) ("Any opposition papers shall be filed and served not later than the Monday before the noting day."). However, because counsel for LifeGoals was unfamiliar with the concept of a "noting date," counsel believed that "the `noting date' was the due date for Responses to Motions." (Mot. at 2.) Thus, LifeGoals submitted responses to both motions on November 17, 2017 — four days after the deadline. (See Resp. to MSJ (Dkt. # 36); Resp. to MTC (Dkt. # 38).) AHR subsequently asked that the court not consider the untimely responses, or in the alternative, to grant an extension of time for AHR to file its replies. (Request (Dkt. # 37) at 1-2.)

The court reprimands LifeGoals and its counsel for its late submissions. Such conduct falls well below the standard of practice expected of attorneys appearing before this court. The court expects counsel for LifeGoals, including its local counsel on the matter, to read and adhere to the local rules for this district. The court will consider substantial sanctions in the future if counsel for LifeGoals continues to fail to meet this minimum standard of practice, and LifeGoals is cautioned that the court will not accept any further tardy filings based on a misapprehension of the court's local rules.

However, because there is no prejudice in this instance to AHR, the court GRANTS leave for Lifegoals to submit its two late responses (Dkt. # 39). The court will accept the two late responses as filed on the docket. (See Resp. to MSJ; Resp. to MTC.) The court further DIRECTS AHR to file its replies, if any, to both responses no later than noon on Wednesday, November 29, 2017. Lastly, the court DIRECTS the Clerk to renote both AHR's motion for summary judgment (Dkt. # 31) and motion to compel (Dkt. # 34) to November 29, 2017.