Washington, Gloria v. Hovensa, LLC
DISTRICT COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS DIVISION OF ST. CROIX 5 GLORIA WASHINGTON, 5 5 Plaintiff, 5 2006-CV-0097 v. 5 5 HOVENSA, L.L.C., and TRIANGLE 5 CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE, 5 INC., 5 5 Defendants. 5 __________________________________________5 TO: Lee J. Rohn, Esq. C. Beth Moss, Esq. ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS THIS MATTER came before the Court upon Plaintiff’s Motion For Sanctions (Docket No. 66). Defendant HOVENSA, L.L.C., filed an opposition to said motion. This order is issued without necessity of reply. Plaintiff seeks sanctions for said Defendant’s alleged failure to comply with the Court’s orders (Docket Nos. 64 and 65) regarding Plaintiff’s motions to compel said Defendant to provide supplemental responses to discovery. As said Defendant notes in its opposition, the said orders did not provide a specific deadline for providing such discovery. The record reflects that said Defendant has served its supplemental discovery Case: 1:06-cv-00097-HB Document #: 70 Filed: 08/22/08 Page 1 of 2 Washington v. HOVENSA, L.L.C. …
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_06-cv-00097/pdf/USCOURTS-vid-1_06-cv-00097-2.pdf
SHA-256 1ddf9e3790e5620a6fcab37e037a1949e6d687e8d812ab8dad734d9f4ad71f80
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-1ddf9e3790e5
Document text
DISTRICT COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS DIVISION OF ST. CROIX 5 GLORIA WASHINGTON, 5 5 Plaintiff, 5 2006-CV-0097 v. 5 5 HOVENSA, L.L.C., and TRIANGLE 5 CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE, 5 INC., 5 5 Defendants. 5 __________________________________________5 TO: Lee J. Rohn, Esq. C. Beth Moss, Esq. ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS THIS MATTER came before the Court upon Plaintiff’s Motion For Sanctions (Docket No. 66). Defendant HOVENSA, L.L.C., filed an opposition to said motion. This order is issued without necessity of reply. Plaintiff seeks sanctions for said Defendant’s alleged failure to comply with the Court’s orders (Docket Nos. 64 and 65) regarding Plaintiff’s motions to compel said Defendant to provide supplemental responses to discovery. As said Defendant notes in its opposition, the said orders did not provide a specific deadline for providing such discovery. The record reflects that said Defendant has served its supplemental discovery Case: 1:06-cv-00097-HB Document #: 70 Filed: 08/22/08 Page 1 of 2 Washington v. HOVENSA, L.L.C. 2006-CV-0097 Order Denying Plaintiff’s Motion For Sanctions responses as directed by said orders. Consequently, the Court finds that Plaintiff’s motion for sanctions is moot. WHEREFORE, it is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion For Sanctions (Docket No. 66) is DENIED AS MOOT. ENTER: Dated: August 22, 2008 /s/ GEORGE W. CANNON, JR. U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE Case: 1:06-cv-00097-HB Document #: 70 Filed: 08/22/08 Page 2 of 2