Canton, Patrice v. Kmart Corporation
DISTRICT COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS DIVISION OF ST. CROIX 5 PATRICE CANTON, 5 5 Plaintiff, 5 1:05-cv-143 v. 5 5 KMART CORPORATION, 5 5 Defendant. 5 ____________________________________5 TO: Lee J. Rohn, Esq. Eugenio W.A. Geigel-Simounet, Esq. ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS THIS MATTER came before the Court upon Plaintiff’s Motion For Sanctions For Failure to Obey the Court Order Dated November 4, 2009 (Docket No. 160). The time for filing a response has expired. The record reflects that Defendant filed a Notice of Supplemental Discovery and Compliance with Court Order (Docket No. 161), wherein Defendant states that it provided the discovery to Plaintiff as directed. WHEREFORE, it is now hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion For Sanctions For Failure to Obey the Court Order Dated November 4, 2009 (Docket No. 160) is DENIED AS MOOT. Case: 1:05-cv-00143-TJS-GWC Document #: 162 Filed: 01/08/10 Page 1 of 2 Canton v. Kmart Corp. 1:05-cv-143 Order Denying Plaintiff’s Motion For Sanctions ENTER: Dated: January 8, 2010 /s/ George W. Cannon, Jr. GEORGE W. CANNON, JR. U.S. …
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_05-cv-00143/pdf/USCOURTS-vid-1_05-cv-00143-3.pdf
SHA-256 1a015aed4013051c5ec0f078ab36ec4eaf80d6c24a97fb4404e982a612b3d608
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-1a015aed4013
Document text
DISTRICT COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS DIVISION OF ST. CROIX 5 PATRICE CANTON, 5 5 Plaintiff, 5 1:05-cv-143 v. 5 5 KMART CORPORATION, 5 5 Defendant. 5 ____________________________________5 TO: Lee J. Rohn, Esq. Eugenio W.A. Geigel-Simounet, Esq. ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS THIS MATTER came before the Court upon Plaintiff’s Motion For Sanctions For Failure to Obey the Court Order Dated November 4, 2009 (Docket No. 160). The time for filing a response has expired. The record reflects that Defendant filed a Notice of Supplemental Discovery and Compliance with Court Order (Docket No. 161), wherein Defendant states that it provided the discovery to Plaintiff as directed. WHEREFORE, it is now hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion For Sanctions For Failure to Obey the Court Order Dated November 4, 2009 (Docket No. 160) is DENIED AS MOOT. Case: 1:05-cv-00143-TJS-GWC Document #: 162 Filed: 01/08/10 Page 1 of 2 Canton v. Kmart Corp. 1:05-cv-143 Order Denying Plaintiff’s Motion For Sanctions ENTER: Dated: January 8, 2010 /s/ George W. Cannon, Jr. GEORGE W. CANNON, JR. U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE Case: 1:05-cv-00143-TJS-GWC Document #: 162 Filed: 01/08/10 Page 2 of 2