Kwasniewski et al v. sanofi-aventis U.S., LLC et al
Filing
138
ORDER Denying without prejudice 137 Defendant Sanofi-Aventis U.S. LLC's Motion for Court Order Permitting Production of Records. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe on 3/17/2014. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - EDS)
1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
8
***
9
JENNIFER KWASNIEWSKI, et al.
10
Plaintiffs,
11
vs.
12
SANOFI-AVENTIS U.S. LLC., et al.,
13
14
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
2:12-cv-00515-GMN-NJK
ORDER
15
16
Before the Court is Defendant Sanofi-Aventis U.S. LLC’s Motion for Court Order Permitting
17
Production of Records (Docket No. 137). The Court has considered Defendant’s motion and finds
18
there is no need for a response. Further, the Court finds this motion appropriately resolved without
19
oral argument. Local Rule 78-2. For the reasons discussed below, Defendant’s motion is hereby
20
DENIED without prejudice.
21
I.
FAILURE TO CITE POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
22
Defendant seeks a Court order “authorizing the release of Mr. Kwasnieski’s employment
23
records from Morgans and Hard Rock.” Docket No. 137, at 9. Defendant has not, however, cited
24
a single case or statute to support its request. Pursuant to Local Rule 7-2(d), “[t]he failure of a
25
moving party to file points and authorities in support of the motion shall constitute a consent to the
26
denial of the motion.” LR 7-2. Accordingly, Defendant has consented to the denial of its motion.
27
Further, to the extent Defendant’s motion was intended to be a motion to compel, Defendant
28
failed to provide the text or responses to any of its written discovery requests. Local Rule 26-7(a)
1
states that “[a]ll motions to compel discovery or for protective order shall set forth in full the text
2
of the discovery originally sought and the response thereto, if any.” LR 26-7(a). Therefore, by not
3
providing the complete text of any discovery request, Defendant’s motion fails to comply with the
4
Local Rules. Additionally, the Court cannot determine that a particular response to a request for
5
discovery was improper without knowing what request was made or what response was given.
6
II.
CONCLUSION
7
Based on the foregoing, and good cause appearing therefore,
8
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant Sanofi-Aventis U.S. LLC’s Motion for Court
9
10
Order Permitting Production of Records (Docket No. 137) is DENIED without prejudice.
DATED: March 17, 2014.
11
12
13
14
NANCY J. KOPPE
United States Magistrate Judge
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-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?