Albritton v. Cisco Systems, Inc. et al

Filing 109

RESPONSE to Motion re 88 MOTION to Compel Plaintiff's Interrogatory Responses filed by Eric Albritton. (Patton, Nicholas)

Albritton v. Cisco Systems, Inc. et al

Doc. 109

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION ERIC M. ALBRITTON, Plaintiff v. CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. RICHARD FRENKEL, MAULLUN YEN and JOHN NOH, Defendant § § § § § § § § § § §

No. 6:08cv00089

PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS' ORIGINAL MOTION TO COMPEL (DE #88) COMES NOW Plaintiff Eric M. Albritton and files this Response to Defendants' Original Motion to Compel (DE #88) and would show unto the Court the following: Plaintiff is not responding substantively to Defendants' original Motion to Compel. After filing the original motion, Defendants then filed an amended motion to compel (DE #104) which moots the original motion. Under Rule 15(a) of the Federal Rules, Plaintiff's response to Defendants' Amended Motion to Compel is due 10 business days after it is served. Plaintiff will therefore be filing its response to Defendants' Amended Motion to Compel on December 19, 2008 Respectfully Submitted, /s/ Nicholas H. Patton Nicholas H. Patton (SBN 63035) Patton, Tidwell & Schroeder, LLP 4605 Texas Boulevard Texarkana, Texas 75503 903.792.7080 / 903.792.8233 (Fax)

Dockets.Justia.com

Patricia L. Peden LAW OFFICE OF PATRICIA L. PEDEN 610 16th Street, Suite 400 Oakland, California 94612 Telephone: [phone] ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that all counsel of record who are deemed to have consented to electronic service are being served with a copy of this document via the Court's CM/ECF system per Local Rule CV-5(a)(3) on this 8th day of December, 2008. /s/ Nicholas H. Patton Nicholas H. Patton

2