Roberson v. Paul Smith, Inc. et al

Filing 98

ORDER denying as moot 95 Motion for Relief Related to the Court's Orders. Counsel is reminded to read the order in its entirety for further information. Signed by Senior Judge James C. Fox on 8/9/2011. (Edwards, S.)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA

WESTERN DIYISION

TRISHA L. ROBERSON,
Plaintiff,
v.
PAUL SMITH, INC.; NORTH
CAROLINA DIGITAL IMAGING,
INC.; PAUL SMITH, SR.; and PAUL
SMITH, JR.
Defendants.
TRISHA L. ROBERSON,
Plaintiff,
v.
PAUL SMITH, INC. and NORTH
CAROLINA DIGITAL IMAGING, INC.
Defendants.

)

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No.5:07-CY-284-F

No.5:08-CY-40-F

ORDER

This matter is before the court on the Motion for Relief Related to the Court's Order filed
4/20/11 [DE-95]. In the Motion, Defendants assert that Plaintiff has failed to comply with the
court's April 20, 2011, Orders [DE-93; DE-20] directing Plaintiff to file another copy of Exhibit
8 [DE-74-1] to Plaintiff s Memorandum in Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment, with
pages 5-7 omitted, to be maintained on the record not under seal. Defendants contend that
Plaintiffs failure to file the redacted copy of the exhibit has prevented this court from remanding
"the matter(s)" to the Johnston County Superior Court.
In the April 20, 2011, Orders [DE-93; DE-20], the court ordered that Case No. 5:07-CY­
284-F be remanded to the Johnston County Superior Court. On the same day the Orders were

filed, the Clerk of Court sent a letter to the Clerk of Court for the Johnston County Superior
Court, notifying him of the remand of Case No. S:07-CV-284-F. See Letter [DE-94].
Since the filing of Defendants' Motion, Plaintiff has complied with the court's order. See
Redaction [DE-97]. Defendants' Motion [DE-96] is therefore DENIED as moot.
SO ORDERED.
This the 9th day of August, 2011.

J~ES C. FOX
Se ior United States District Judge

2