Sampson v. Schenck et al

Filing 395

ORDER - This matter is before the court on the plaintiff's Response to Order to Show Cause 394 . After denying the plaintiff's Motion to Compel Discovery and for Reasonable Attorney's Fees 354 , the court required the plaintiff to s how cause why sanctions should not be entered in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(5)(B). Under the circumstances of this case and in light of the plaintiff's response, the court finds no sanctions are appropriate at this time. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Thomas D. Thalken. (KBJ)

-TDT Sampson v. Schenck et al

Doc. 395

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA NICHOLAS SAMPSON, Plaintiff, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

8:07CV155

v. EARL SCHENCK, et al., Defendants.

ORDER

This matter is before the court on the plaintiff's Response to Order to Show Cause (Filing No. 394). After denying the plaintiff's Motion to Compel Discovery and for

Reasonable Attorney's Fees (Filing No. 354), the court required the plaintiff to show cause why sanctions should not be entered in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(5)(B). Under the circumstances of this case and in light of the plaintiff's response, the court finds no sanctions are appropriate at this time.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 27th day of July, 2010. BY THE COURT:

s/ Thomas D. Thalken United States Magistrate Judge

Dockets.Justia.com