Odyssey Marine Exploration, Inc. v. The Unidentified Shipwrecked Vessel

Filing 252

ORDER granting 249 --motion for leave to file; Peru may file by 10/16/2009 a fifteen page response; granting 245 --motion for clarification; the "cargo claimants" may file by 10/16/2009 a joint reply; denying as moot 246 --supplemental motion for clarification; denying 248 --motion for leave to file declaration. Signed by Judge Steven D. Merryday on 10/6/2009. (BK)

Odyssey Marine Exploration, Inc. v. The Unidentified Shipwrecked Vessel

Doc. 252

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION ODYSSEY MARINE EXPLORATION, INC., Plaintiff, v. UNIDENTIFIED, SHIPWRECKED VESSEL, Defendant, KINGDOM OF SPAIN, et al., Claimants. __________________________________/ ORDER The Republic of Peru moves (Doc. 249) for leave (1) to respond to the United States' statement of interest (Doc. 247) and (2) to reply in support of the objection to the magistrate's report and recommendation (Doc. 209). Peru's motion (Doc. 249) is GRANTED. On or before October 16, 2009, Peru may submit a single document of no more than fifteen (15) pages responding to the statement of interest and replying in support of the objection. The "Cargo Claimants Whitlock and Durand[`s] Request for Clarification" (Doc. 245) is GRANTED. On or before October 16, 2009, the "cargo claimants" may submit a joint reply in support of their objections to the report and recommendation. The reply may not exceed ten (10) pages. The supplemental motion (Doc. 246) is CASE NO: 8:07-cv-614-T-23MAP

Dockets.Justia.com

DENIED AS MOOT. Absent extraordinary circumstance, no further paper will be received in response to the report and recommendation. The plaintiff moves (Doc. 248) "for leave to file the declaration of J. Ashley Roach, JAGC, USN (Ret.), in response to the statement of interest and brief of the United States." Although allowing the plaintiff to respond to the United States' statement of interest, a September 18, 2009, order (Doc. 244) strikes the evidence offered by the United States. The parties enjoyed ample opportunity to present evidence to the magistrate judge, and the United States' appearance in this case fails to justify allowing the parties to present new evidence not considered by the magistrate judge. The September 18, 2009, order precludes the presentation of further evidence, and the plaintiff's motion (Doc. 248) is DENIED. ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, on October 6, 2009.

xc: Magistrate Judge

-2-