Scher v. Hovensa, LLC
DISTRICT COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS DIVISION OF ST. CROIX 5 MARC SCHER, 5 5 Plaintiff, 5 1:08-cv-73 v. 5 5 HOVENSA, L.L.C., 5 5 Defendant. 5 __________________________________________5 TO: Lee J. Rohn, Esq. Stephanie L. Adler, Esq. ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO COMPEL THIS MATTER came before the Court upon Defendant HOVENSA, LLC’s Motion to Compel Plaintiff’s Responses to Defendant’s First Request For Production of Documents (Docket No. 18). Plaintiff filed a response thereto. The time for filing a reply has expired. Defendant asserts that Plaintiff has failed, despite repeated requests, to provide his responses to Defendant’s requests for production of documents. Plaintiff claims, and the record reflects, that such responses were served on or about April 17, 2009. Consequently, the Court finds the motion moot. Case: 1:08-cv-00073-RLF-GWC Document #: 21 Filed: 05/22/09 Page 1 of 2 Scher v. …
Download the original document · Plain text (TXT) · Browse the archive · How this archive works
Original source: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-vid-1_08-cv-00073/pdf/USCOURTS-vid-1_08-cv-00073-0.pdf
SHA-256 17481c43457b448f0ec250b229651fb8ba531f6e27e6798af022bbdfba123ba1
Re-using this document
two independent grounds: a work of the United States Government under 17 USC 105, AND a judicial opinion, which is an edict of government and uncopyrightable by anyone including the court that wrote it
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-17481c43457b
Document text
DISTRICT COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS DIVISION OF ST. CROIX 5 MARC SCHER, 5 5 Plaintiff, 5 1:08-cv-73 v. 5 5 HOVENSA, L.L.C., 5 5 Defendant. 5 __________________________________________5 TO: Lee J. Rohn, Esq. Stephanie L. Adler, Esq. ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO COMPEL THIS MATTER came before the Court upon Defendant HOVENSA, LLC’s Motion to Compel Plaintiff’s Responses to Defendant’s First Request For Production of Documents (Docket No. 18). Plaintiff filed a response thereto. The time for filing a reply has expired. Defendant asserts that Plaintiff has failed, despite repeated requests, to provide his responses to Defendant’s requests for production of documents. Plaintiff claims, and the record reflects, that such responses were served on or about April 17, 2009. Consequently, the Court finds the motion moot. Case: 1:08-cv-00073-RLF-GWC Document #: 21 Filed: 05/22/09 Page 1 of 2 Scher v. HOVENSA, L.L.C 1:08-CV-73 Order Regarding Defendant’s Motion to Compel Accordingly it is now hereby ORDERED that Defendant HOVENSA, LLC’s Motion to Compel Plaintiff’s Responses to Defendant’s First Request For Production of Documents (Docket No. 18) is DENIED AS MOOT. ENTER: Dated: May 22, 2009 /s/ George W. Cannon, Jr. GEORGE W. CANNON, JR. U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE Case: 1:08-cv-00073-RLF-GWC Document #: 21 Filed: 05/22/09 Page 2 of 2