Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

KINGSTON v. TAP TECHNOLOGIES, INC., 2:11-cv-339-FtM-29SPC. (2012)

Court: District Court, M.D. Florida Number: infdco20120222a15 Visitors: 5
Filed: Feb. 21, 2012
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2012
Summary: ORDER SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL, District Judge. This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Defendant, TAP Technologies, Inc.'s, Complete Answers to Plaintiff's First Set of Interrogatories (Doc. #22) filed on February 7, 2012. Defendant filed its response (Doc. #23) on February 17, 2012. Thus, the issues raised in the Motion are now ripe for the Court's review. Plaintiff filed a Motion to Compel the Defendant to produce a more complete answer to Interrogatory 14 of its
More

ORDER

SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL, District Judge.

This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Defendant, TAP Technologies, Inc.'s, Complete Answers to Plaintiff's First Set of Interrogatories (Doc. #22) filed on February 7, 2012. Defendant filed its response (Doc. #23) on February 17, 2012. Thus, the issues raised in the Motion are now ripe for the Court's review.

Plaintiff filed a Motion to Compel the Defendant to produce a more complete answer to Interrogatory 14 of its First Set of Interrogatories. The Interrogatory requested a complete list of all individuals who now or in the past have performed duties as tap cleaner for Defendant, including contact information. In response, Defendant requests that the Court deny the Motion as moot as it has now produced a full list of names of individuals and contact information that is responsive to Interrogatory 14. (Exh. A, Doc. #22-1). Defendant notes though that certain individuals did not wish to provide their email address, while some email addresses are listed. The Court finds that the individuals will not be required to provide their email addresses if they choose not to. All of the individuals' name, mailing address, and telephone numbers are included so that Plaintiff has other ways to reach the individuals rather than email.

Accordingly, it is now

ORDERED:

Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Defendant, TAP Technologies, Inc.'s, Complete Answers to Plaintiff's First Set of Interrogatories (Doc. #22) is DENIED as moot.

DONE AND ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer