Durham v. Niffenegger et al
ORDER Plaintiff's motion 80 is therefore STRICKEN. Plaintiff is ORDERED to comply with the Court's Standing Order as referenced herein. Signed by Magistrate Judge Karen L. Litkovitz on 4/28/2021. (art)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTICT OF OHIO
Case No. 1:18-cv-91
DETECTIVE JERRY NIFFENEGGER, et. al.
This matter is before the Court on plaintiff David Durham’s motion to compel (Doc. 80).
The Court’s Standing Order, at §§ I.D.2-3, sets forth its procedures regarding motions relating to
discovery. The Court does not entertain discovery motions until the parties have satisfied those
procedures. First, the parties must attempt to resolve the dispute by extrajudicial means, which
the Court defines to include both in-writing and telephonic efforts. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(1);
S.D. Ohio Civ. R. 37.1. If unsuccessful, the parties are to contact the Court’s Courtroom Deputy
to schedule an informal discovery conference.
Plaintiff’s motion (Doc. 80) is therefore STRICKEN. Plaintiff is ORDERED to comply
with the Court’s Standing Order as referenced herein.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Karen L. Litkovitz
United States Magistrate Judge
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?