Miller et al v. The Board of Regents of the University of Minnesota

Filing 5

ORDER terminating as moot 1 Motion to Quash. Signed by Magistrate Judge Philip R. Lammens on 4/11/2017. (AR)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA OCALA DIVISION SHANNON MILLER, JEN BANFORD and ANNETTE WILES, Plaintiffs, v. Case No: 5:17-mc-5-Oc-10PRL THE BOARD OF REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA Defendant, and DAVID GOLDBERG Non-Party. ORDER On April 3, 2017, the Court issued an Order directing the parties and non-party, David Goldberg, to show cause why Mr. Goldberg’s motion to transfer and quash subpoena should not be denied as moot. (Doc. 2). The parties and Mr. Goldberg have now filed responses advising that the issue raised by the motion – specifically, whether the subpoena for Mr. Goldberg’s deposition on March 31, 2017 should be quashed – is moot because the date for which the deposition was noticed has already passed. (Docs. 3, 4). Nonetheless, Mr. Goldberg and Defendant assert that “to the extent Plaintiffs intend to seek enforcement of the subpoena, or the imposition of sanctions or adverse inferences due to Mr. Goldberg failing to appear for deposition on March 31, 2017, then, respectfully, Mr. Goldberg asserts that his motion should not be denied as moot, but should be transferred to the District of Minnesota for further proceedings.” Doc. 3 at 2-3. However, none of these potential scenarios are raised by the instant motion. Because, at this point, there is no live controversy for the Court to consider here, there is likewise nothing to be transferred to the District of Minnesota. Accordingly, Mr. Goldberg’s motion to transfer and quash subpoena (Doc. 1) is terminated as moot. The Clerk is directed to close this matter. DONE and ORDERED in Ocala, Florida on April 11, 2017. Copies furnished to: Counsel of Record Unrepresented Parties -2-

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?