U.S. v. Jayakar, 19-20173. (2019)
Court: District Court, E.D. Michigan
Number: infdco20190503f08
Visitors: 16
Filed: May 02, 2019
Latest Update: May 02, 2019
Summary: ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR DISCOVERY (Doc. 32) GEORGE CARAM STEEH , District Judge . Defendant Gandam Jayakar filed a motion for discovery on May 1, 2019. Although the motion stated that the government did not concur in the relief requested, the government avers that defense counsel did not attempt to seek concurrence. Pursuant to L.R. 7.1(a), a movant must seek concurrence before filing a motion. The purpose of this rule is for the parties to ascertain whether there are matters truly in disp
Summary: ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR DISCOVERY (Doc. 32) GEORGE CARAM STEEH , District Judge . Defendant Gandam Jayakar filed a motion for discovery on May 1, 2019. Although the motion stated that the government did not concur in the relief requested, the government avers that defense counsel did not attempt to seek concurrence. Pursuant to L.R. 7.1(a), a movant must seek concurrence before filing a motion. The purpose of this rule is for the parties to ascertain whether there are matters truly in dispu..
More
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR DISCOVERY (Doc. 32)
GEORGE CARAM STEEH, District Judge.
Defendant Gandam Jayakar filed a motion for discovery on May 1, 2019. Although the motion stated that the government did not concur in the relief requested, the government avers that defense counsel did not attempt to seek concurrence. Pursuant to L.R. 7.1(a), a movant must seek concurrence before filing a motion. The purpose of this rule is for the parties to ascertain whether there are matters truly in dispute before seeking to avail themselves of the resources of the court. The court expects the parties to comply with the letter and spirit of L.R. 7.1.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant's motion for discovery (Doc. 32) is DENIED.
Source: Leagle
