Wright v. Sperling et al
Filing
67
ORDER DEEMING MOOT THE BULK OF PLAINTIFF'S AND IMPLEMENTING STIPULATION 57 Motion to Compel--Signed by Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti.(MWil).
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
DOUGLAS WRIGHT,
Plaintiff
v.
Case No. 2:16-CV-12113
District Judge Marianne O. Battani
Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti
KYLE SPERLING,
BETSY SPREEMAN,
KEITH PAPENDICK,
STEVEN BERGMAN and
CORIZON HEALTH, INC.,
Defendants.
___________________________________/
ORDER DEEMING MOOT THE BULK OF PLAINTIFF’S JANUARY 10,
2018 MOTION TO COMPEL DEFENDANT CORIZON’S PRODUCTION
OF RECORDS AND IMPLEMENTING STIPULATION (DE 57)
This matter is before the Court for consideration of the above-described
motion, regarding which a response and a joint statement of resolved and
unresolved issues have been filed. (DEs 57, 61, 66.) Judge Battani referred this
motion to me for hearing and determination, and a hearing was noticed for March
9, 2018. (DEs 58-60, 62-63.) On the date set for hearing, attorneys Thomas E.
Kuhn and John C. Cardello appeared in my courtroom.
The March 6, 2018 joint statement revealed that the unresolved issues were
limited to three requests to produce - Nos. 3, 4 and 9. (DE 66 at 2.) However, by
the time of the March 9, 2018 hearing, attorneys Kuhn and Cardello had reached
an agreement as to the remainder of the motion. Accordingly, in order to
implement the stipulation that was placed on the record, no later than Friday,
March 16, 2018, Defendant Corizon SHALL supplement its answers to Requests
to Produce Nos. 3, 4, and 9, in writing, consistent with the representations placed
on the record.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: March 9, 2018
s/Anthony P. Patti
Anthony P. Patti
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Certificate of Service
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was sent to parties of record
on March 9, 2018, electronically and/or by U.S. Mail.
s/Michael Williams
Case Manager for the
Honorable Anthony P. Patti
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?