U.S. v. MEDINA-CHAIDEZ, CR-15-00730-001-TUC-JAS. (2015)
Court: District Court, D. Arizona
Number: infdco20150901690
Visitors: 6
Filed: Aug. 31, 2015
Latest Update: Aug. 31, 2015
Summary: ORDER JAMES A. SOTO , District Judge . A review of the record reflects that responses to any motions in limine were due no later than 8/28/15 ( see Doc. 32), but Defendants have not filed any response to the Government's motion in limine ("MIL") (Doc. 34) filed on 8/14/15. By no later than 9/4/15, Defendants shall file a response to the Government's motion in limine or a notice of non-opposition to the Government's motion in limine. If the Court does not receive any responsive document fro
Summary: ORDER JAMES A. SOTO , District Judge . A review of the record reflects that responses to any motions in limine were due no later than 8/28/15 ( see Doc. 32), but Defendants have not filed any response to the Government's motion in limine ("MIL") (Doc. 34) filed on 8/14/15. By no later than 9/4/15, Defendants shall file a response to the Government's motion in limine or a notice of non-opposition to the Government's motion in limine. If the Court does not receive any responsive document from..
More
ORDER
JAMES A. SOTO, District Judge.
A review of the record reflects that responses to any motions in limine were due no later than 8/28/15 (see Doc. 32), but Defendants have not filed any response to the Government's motion in limine ("MIL") (Doc. 34) filed on 8/14/15. By no later than 9/4/15, Defendants shall file a response to the Government's motion in limine or a notice of non-opposition to the Government's motion in limine. If the Court does not receive any responsive document from Defendants by 9/4/15, the Court will deem such non-response as a consent to summarily granting the Government's motion in limine (Doc. 34) without further notice to Defendants.
Source: Leagle
