Cox v. Davis et al

Filing 66

ORDER finding as moot 47 Motion to Compel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Thomas E Rogers, III on 02/28/2014.(dsto, )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
FLORENCE DIVISION

CHAVIS LARANZO COX, #327335,

) C/A NO.: 4:13-cv-00125-MGL-TER
)
PLAINTIFF,
)
)
VS.
)
ORDER
)
ANTHONY DAVIS; BRUCE OBERMAN;
)
ANTHONY J. PADULA,
)
)
DEFENDANTS.
)
__________________________________________)
This matter came before the Court upon a Motion to Compel Discovery filed by Plaintiff on
October 29, 2013. (Doc. # 47). Defendant responded to the motion to compel stating that he is
unable to determine which discovery the Plaintiff has served on the Defendant that he seeks to
compel further response and/or deems incomplete, but has updated his responses to Plaintiff’s
discovery in his possession and forwarded to Plaintiff on February 26, 2014, out of an abundance
of caution. Therefore, this motion is deemed moot.1
IT IS SO ORDERED.

February 28, 2014
Florence, South Carolina

1

s/Thomas E. Rogers, III
Thomas E. Rogers, III
United States Magistrate Judge

Alternatively, Plaintiff’s motion does not comply with Local Rule 37.01 (A) and (B)
due to Plaintiff’s failure to submit the required documents to allow proper review by the court
and/or the motion is not timely. Thus, the motion is denied.