Nealy v. Lotych et al

Filing 58

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S 43 Motion for Costs. Signed by Magistrate Judge R. Steven Whalen. (Ciesla, C)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
JUNE NEALY,
Plaintiff,

No. 13-11969

v.

District Judge Denise Page Hood
Magistrate Judge R. Steven Whalen

VICTOR LOTYCZ, ET AL.,
Defendants.
/
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR COSTS [Doc. #43]
Plaintiff’s Motion for Costs and Attorney Fees [Doc. #43] is DENIED. In support
of her motion, Plaintiff cites Fed.R.Civ.P. 37(a)(B), which does not exist. Moreover, Rule
37(a)(5) provides for a non-prevailing party in a discovery motion, as described in Rule
37(a)(3), to be assessed costs and fees. The motion on which the Plaintiff prevailed was a
defense motion for a protective order, which does not fall within Rule 37. Finally,
Plaintiff’s motion does not reference the pre-filing conference seeking concurrence, as
required by E.D. Mich. L.R. 7.1(a).
Defendants’ request for costs under 28 U.S.C. § 1927, contained in their response
to the present motion [Doc. #53], is likewise DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/R. Steven Whalen
R. STEVEN WHALEN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Dated: April 22, 2015

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was sent to parties of record on
April 22, 2015, electronically and/or by U.S. mail.
s/Carolyn M. Ciesla
Case Manager