Paul Abney, Dr. v. University of The Virgin Islands
DISTRICT COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS DIVISION OF ST. CROIX 5 DR. PAUL ABNEY, 5 5 Plaintiff, 5 1:08-cv-116 5 v. 5 5 UNIVERSITY OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS, 5 5 Defendant. 5 __________________________________________5 TO: Lee J. Rohn, Esq. Marie E. Thomas-Griffith, Esq. ORDER THIS MATTER is before the Court upon Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Defendant to Respond to Discovery (Docket No. 29). The time for filing a response to said motion has expired. Plaintiff claims that Defendant never responded to written discovery propounded on October 6, 2009. Motion at 1. A review of the record reveals that Defendant has filed notices of service of answers to Plaintiff’s first set of interrogatories and responses to Plaintiff’s demand for production of documents (Docket Nos. 30 and 31, respectively). Consequently, the Court finds the motion moot. Abney v. University of the Virgin Islands 1:08-cv-116 Order Accordingly, it is now hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Defendant to Respond to Discovery (Docket No. 29) is DENIED AS MOOT. ENTER: Dated: February 11, 2010 /s/ George W. Cannon, Jr. …
Download the original document · Plain text (TXT) · Browse the archive · How this archive works
Original source: https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.vid.26280/gov.uscourts.vid.26280.32.0.pdf
SHA-256 0952dc7850f985fd836db370aa7d8ac58924a1c239df114e59004e336d6213a6
Re-using this document
mixed and recorded per item: public domain by age or as a US government work for what was taken; controlled-digital-lending and restrictively licensed items EXCLUDED, each listed with its reason
Our description, tagging, arrangement, extracted text and machine transcripts are released under CC0 1.0. We assert nothing about the document itself.
Archive identifier LF-0952dc7850f9
Document text
DISTRICT COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS DIVISION OF ST. CROIX 5 DR. PAUL ABNEY, 5 5 Plaintiff, 5 1:08-cv-116 5 v. 5 5 UNIVERSITY OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS, 5 5 Defendant. 5 __________________________________________5 TO: Lee J. Rohn, Esq. Marie E. Thomas-Griffith, Esq. ORDER THIS MATTER is before the Court upon Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Defendant to Respond to Discovery (Docket No. 29). The time for filing a response to said motion has expired. Plaintiff claims that Defendant never responded to written discovery propounded on October 6, 2009. Motion at 1. A review of the record reveals that Defendant has filed notices of service of answers to Plaintiff’s first set of interrogatories and responses to Plaintiff’s demand for production of documents (Docket Nos. 30 and 31, respectively). Consequently, the Court finds the motion moot. Abney v. University of the Virgin Islands 1:08-cv-116 Order Accordingly, it is now hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Defendant to Respond to Discovery (Docket No. 29) is DENIED AS MOOT. ENTER: Dated: February 11, 2010 /s/ George W. Cannon, Jr. GEORGE W. CANNON, JR. U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE