Capers v. Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC

Filing 12

ORDER denying without prejudice Defendant's 11 Motion to Compel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis Howell on 6/28/2017. (khm)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR
THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
CHARLOTTE DIVISION
3:16 CV 776

OMEGA T. CAPERS,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiff
v
DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC,
Defendant.

ORDER

THIS MATTER is before the undersigned pursuant to Defendant’s Motion
to Compel (#11) filed by counsel for Defendant. LCvR 7.1(B) and (C) states as
follows:
(B) Requirement of Consultation. Any motions other than for
dismissal, summary judgment, or default judgment shall show that
counsel have conferred or attempted to confer and have attempted in
good faith to resolve areas of disagreement and set forth which issues
remain unresolved.
(C) Requirement of Briefs. Briefs shall be filed contemporaneously
with the motion, except no brief is required in support of timely motions
for extension of time, continuances, admission pro hac vice, or early
discovery. Exhibits in support of a brief shall be attached as appendices
as specified in the Administrative Procedures. Factual contentions shall
be supported as specifically as possible by citation to exhibit number
and page.
The Pretrial Order and Case Management Plan (#10) entered in this matter by
United States District Judge Robert J. Conrad, Jr. provides:
1

II.
F.
MOTIONS TO COMPEL: A motion to compel must include a
statement by the movant that the parties have conferred in good faith in
an attempt to resolve the dispute and are unable to do so. Consistent
with the spirit, purpose, and explicit directives of the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure and the Local Rules of the Western District of North
Carolina, the Court expects all parties (and counsel) to attempt in good
faith to resolve discovery disputes without the necessity of Court
intervention. Failure to do so may result in appropriate sanctions.
An examination of Defendant’s Motion to Compel shows that Defendant has
not shown that counsel has attempted to confer regarding Defendant’s motion.
Defendant does discuss several emails concerning discovery, but there is never a
clear indication that Defendant’s counsel has contacted Plaintiff’s counsel and
advise them specifically that the Motion to Compel would be filed and that they have
attempted to confer in good faith to resolve the areas of disagreement as required by
Local Rules and by Judge Conrad’s Pretrial Order and Case Management Plan.
An examination of the motion further shows that Defendant has not filed a
brief in support of the motion. Defendant does have a portion of its motion
delineated as “Law and Argument” but that does not satisfy the requirement of a
separate brief as set forth by Local Rule 7.1(C).
For the above reasons, Defendant’s Motion to Compel will be denied without
prejudice.
ORDER
2

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion to Compel
(#11) is DENIED for the foregoing reasons without prejudice.

Signed: June 28, 2017

3