ORDER STRIKING THE "CONCURRENCES" FILED IN RESPONSE TO THE DEBTOR'S MOTIONS FOR RECONSIDERATION

THOMAS J. TUCKER, Bankruptcy Judge.

On October 30, 2017, the Debtor filed two motions for reconsideration (Docket ## 159, 160, the "Reconsideration Motions"), seeking reconsideration of the two orders entered by the Court on October 13, 2017 (Docket ## 143, 145). Today the Court is entering separate orders denying the Reconsideration Motions.

This Order concerns the fact that several parties filed "concurrences" in support of the Debtor's Reconsideration Motions. Such concurrences were filed by the following parties:

1. Gaylor Electric, Inc. (Docket ## 161, 162);

2. Welling, Inc. (Docket ## 165, 171);

3. Spittler Strategic Services and Built Form Architecture, Inc. (joint filing) (Docket # 167);

4. Kitch Drutchas Wagner Valitutti & Sherbrook (Docket ## 168, 169); and

5. Harbor Development LLC (Docket ## 173, 175).1

The Court will strike all of these "concurrences," because they each amount to a "response" to the Debtor's Reconsideration Motions, and as such, are expressly prohibited by E.D. Mich. LBR 9024-1(a)(2) and 9024-1(b). Those local rules state, with respect to a motion for reconsideration, that "[n]o response to the motion . . . will be allowed unless the court otherwise orders;" and with respect to a motion under Civil Rule 59(e), "no response may be filed . . . unless the court so orders." This Court did not order that anyone could file a response to either of the Debtor's Reconsideration Motions.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that all of the "concurrences" identified in this Order, above — i.e., the documents filed at Docket ## 161, 162, 165, 167, 168, 169, 171, 173, and 175 — are stricken from the record of this case.