Filed: Jun. 09, 2014
Latest Update: Jun. 09, 2014
Summary: ORDER MAX O. COGBURN, Jr., District Judge. THIS MATTER is before the court on periodic review of the Asheville Docket. Review of the docket reveals that issues joined May 15, 2014, when counterclaim defendants filed their Reply to the Counterclaims (#9) docketed as an "Answer to Answer"). Under L.Cv.R. 16.1 (A), the parties had 14 days from such filing to conduct the IAC (May 29, 2014), and seven days from that date to file their CIAC (June 5, 2014). Review on June 9, 2104, reveals non-compli
Summary: ORDER MAX O. COGBURN, Jr., District Judge. THIS MATTER is before the court on periodic review of the Asheville Docket. Review of the docket reveals that issues joined May 15, 2014, when counterclaim defendants filed their Reply to the Counterclaims (#9) docketed as an "Answer to Answer"). Under L.Cv.R. 16.1 (A), the parties had 14 days from such filing to conduct the IAC (May 29, 2014), and seven days from that date to file their CIAC (June 5, 2014). Review on June 9, 2104, reveals non-complia..
More
ORDER
MAX O. COGBURN, Jr., District Judge.
THIS MATTER is before the court on periodic review of the Asheville Docket. Review of the docket reveals that issues joined May 15, 2014, when counterclaim defendants filed their Reply to the Counterclaims (#9) docketed as an "Answer to Answer"). Under L.Cv.R. 16.1 (A), the parties had 14 days from such filing to conduct the IAC (May 29, 2014), and seven days from that date to file their CIAC (June 5, 2014). Review on June 9, 2104, reveals non-compliance.
ORDER
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the parties bring this matter into compliance by filing their CIAC within seven days.
