FIDDLER'S CREEK, LLC v. NAPLES LENDING GROUP LC, 2:14-cv-379-FtM-29CM. (2015)
Court: District Court, M.D. Florida
Number: infdco20150814849
Visitors: 9
Filed: Aug. 13, 2015
Latest Update: Aug. 13, 2015
Summary: ORDER CAROL MIRANDO , Magistrate Judge . Before the Court is Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Reply (Doc. 142), filed on August 10, 2015, and Defendants' Response to Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Reply to Defendants' Response to Plaintiff's Motion to Exceed Ten (10) Depositions (Doc. 143), filed on August 12, 2015. Plaintiff seeks leave of Court to file a reply of no more than ten (10) pages, in part because "Defendants' Response includes arguments to which Plaintiff has not yet
Summary: ORDER CAROL MIRANDO , Magistrate Judge . Before the Court is Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Reply (Doc. 142), filed on August 10, 2015, and Defendants' Response to Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Reply to Defendants' Response to Plaintiff's Motion to Exceed Ten (10) Depositions (Doc. 143), filed on August 12, 2015. Plaintiff seeks leave of Court to file a reply of no more than ten (10) pages, in part because "Defendants' Response includes arguments to which Plaintiff has not yet ..
More
ORDER
CAROL MIRANDO, Magistrate Judge.
Before the Court is Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Reply (Doc. 142), filed on August 10, 2015, and Defendants' Response to Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Reply to Defendants' Response to Plaintiff's Motion to Exceed Ten (10) Depositions (Doc. 143), filed on August 12, 2015. Plaintiff seeks leave of Court to file a reply of no more than ten (10) pages, in part because "Defendants' Response includes arguments to which Plaintiff has not yet had a chance to address." Doc. 142 at 1. A hearing on Plaintiff's underlying motion currently is scheduled for August 18, 2015. Doc. 133. Both parties will be afforded an opportunity to make arguments at the hearing. The Court therefore does not believe a reply will be beneficial at this time.
ACCORDINGLY, it is hereby
ORDERED:
Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Reply (Doc. 142) is DENIED.
DONE and ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
