Reinsdorf v. Academy, Ltd.

Filing 43

ORDER: This matter is before the Court upon Plaintiffs "Motion for an Order Regarding the Preservation of Evidence." Docket No. #36 . Plaintiff has filed a supporting Memorandum. Docket No. #37 . Defendant has filed a Response in Opposition to the Motion. Docket No. #40 . Judge Campbell has referred the Motion to the undersigned for decision. Docket No. #39 . It can readily be seen that Plaintiff essentially wants the Court to grant a discovery request that has not been made. Plaintiffs "evidence" that Defendant may have already spoliated evidence is not convincing. As Defendant argues, "If a formal motion were required in every case to reaffirm the parties' pre-existing preservation obligations, the Court's docket would be hopelessly clogged by pointless motion after pointless motion." Docket No. #40 , p. 2. For the foregoing reasons, the instant Motion (Docket No. #36 ) is DENIED. It is so Ordered. Signed by Magistrate Judge E. Clifton Knowles on 7/10/13. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(la)