Ronning v. Fannie Mae, CV-17-03331-PHX-ESW. (2019)
Court: District Court, D. Arizona
Number: infdco20190111917
Visitors: 11
Filed: Jan. 10, 2019
Latest Update: Jan. 10, 2019
Summary: ORDER EILEEN S. WILLETT , Magistrate Judge . The Court has considered Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Compliance with Subpoena and Request for Order to Show Cause Why Non-Party Sheryl Bowden Should Not Be Held in Contempt (Doc. 70). No response has been filed, and the time for doing so has passed. LRCiv. 7.2(c). Non-party Sheryl Bowden's ("Bowden") failure to timely file a response is deemed to be consent to the granting of the Motion. LRCiv. 7.2(i). For good cause shown, IT IS ORDERED grant
Summary: ORDER EILEEN S. WILLETT , Magistrate Judge . The Court has considered Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Compliance with Subpoena and Request for Order to Show Cause Why Non-Party Sheryl Bowden Should Not Be Held in Contempt (Doc. 70). No response has been filed, and the time for doing so has passed. LRCiv. 7.2(c). Non-party Sheryl Bowden's ("Bowden") failure to timely file a response is deemed to be consent to the granting of the Motion. LRCiv. 7.2(i). For good cause shown, IT IS ORDERED granti..
More
ORDER
EILEEN S. WILLETT, Magistrate Judge.
The Court has considered Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Compliance with Subpoena and Request for Order to Show Cause Why Non-Party Sheryl Bowden Should Not Be Held in Contempt (Doc. 70).
No response has been filed, and the time for doing so has passed. LRCiv. 7.2(c). Non-party Sheryl Bowden's ("Bowden") failure to timely file a response is deemed to be consent to the granting of the Motion. LRCiv. 7.2(i). For good cause shown,
IT IS ORDERED granting Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Compliance with Subpoena (Doc. 70). Non-party Bowden shall comply with Plaintiff's Amended Subpoena Duces Tecum no later than close of business January 22, 2019.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying Plaintiffs' request for an award of reasonable attorneys' fees incurred in the filing of this Motion. See Sali v. Corona Regional Medical Center, 884 F.3d 1218, 1224 (9th Cir. 2018).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying Plaintiffs' request for an Order to Show Cause as premature. Plaintiffs may reurge a motion for an order to show cause should such a motion be necessary.
Source: Leagle
