D.G. v. CITY OF LAS CRUCES, CV 14-368 MCA/WPL. (2015)
Court: District Court, D. New Mexico
Number: infdco20150420a49
Visitors: 4
Filed: Apr. 10, 2015
Latest Update: Apr. 10, 2015
Summary: ORDER WILLIAM P. LYNCH , Magistrate Judge . On February 17, 2015, Almanza Abrams filed a Motion to Quash Subpoenas on behalf of Michael Garcia. (Doc. 88.) I entered an Order on March 16, 2015, requiring Garcia to submit the objected-to subpoenas by March 23, 2015. (Doc. 110.) Garcia submitted the objected-to subpoenas on March 23, 2015. (Doc. 117.) D.G.'s response was due on April 9, 2015, but she did not file a response in opposition. See FED. R. CIV. P. 6(d); D.N.M.LR-Civ. 7.4(a). The
Summary: ORDER WILLIAM P. LYNCH , Magistrate Judge . On February 17, 2015, Almanza Abrams filed a Motion to Quash Subpoenas on behalf of Michael Garcia. (Doc. 88.) I entered an Order on March 16, 2015, requiring Garcia to submit the objected-to subpoenas by March 23, 2015. (Doc. 110.) Garcia submitted the objected-to subpoenas on March 23, 2015. (Doc. 117.) D.G.'s response was due on April 9, 2015, but she did not file a response in opposition. See FED. R. CIV. P. 6(d); D.N.M.LR-Civ. 7.4(a). The ..
More
ORDER
WILLIAM P. LYNCH, Magistrate Judge.
On February 17, 2015, Almanza Abrams filed a Motion to Quash Subpoenas on behalf of Michael Garcia. (Doc. 88.) I entered an Order on March 16, 2015, requiring Garcia to submit the objected-to subpoenas by March 23, 2015. (Doc. 110.) Garcia submitted the objected-to subpoenas on March 23, 2015. (Doc. 117.) D.G.'s response was due on April 9, 2015, but she did not file a response in opposition. See FED. R. CIV. P. 6(d); D.N.M.LR-Civ. 7.4(a). The failure to respond in opposition constitutes consent to grant the motion. See D.N.M.LR-Civ. 7.1(b). Accordingly, I grant Garcia's motion to quash the objected-to subpoenas.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle