Edwards v. Warner-Lambert Co et al
Filing
42
ORDER finding as moot 40 Motion. Signed by Magistrate Judge Mark R. Abel on 8/3/12. (sh1)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION
:
Keith Edwards,
v.
Warner-Lambert Co., et al.,
Defendants
:
Civil Action 2:05-cv-00657
:
Plaintiff
Judge Smith
:
Magistrate Judge Abel
:
ORDER
The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to remove plaintiff’s May 16, 2012 motion to
defer attorney fee award (doc. 40) from the pending motions list. It is MOOT. The
Court’s June 13, 2012 Order stated:
If the Defendants intend to pursue the Court’s earlier award of attorney’s
fees (Docs 32, 39), then the Defendants shall submit an affidavit and
supporting evidence relating to the amount of fees sought pursuant to the
Court’s earlier Order. Such affidavit and evidence shall be filed within
fourteen (14) days of the date of this Order. Upon receipt of the
Defendant’s request for fees, the Court will consider the Plaintiff’s
outstanding Motion to Defer Attorney’s Fees (Doc 40).
Doc. 41. Defendants have failed to submit an affidavit and supporting evidence as
required by the Court’s Order. As a result, defendants are prohibited from pursuing an
attorney fee award against plaintiff with respect to this matter.
Under the provisions of 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1)(A), Rule 72(a), Fed. R. Civ. P., and
Eastern Division Order No. 91-3, pt. F, 5, either party may, within fourteen (14) days
1
after this Order is filed, file and serve on the opposing party a motion for
reconsideration by the District Judge. The motion must specifically designate the
Order, or part thereof, in question and the basis for any objection thereto. The District
Judge, upon consideration of the motion, shall set aside any part of this Order found to
be clearly erroneous or contrary to law.
s/ Mark R. Abel
United States Magistrate Judge
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?