Matches in SCALES for { <http://schemas.scales-okn.org/rdf/scales#/DocketEntry/flsd;;0:16-cv-60004_de27> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 10 of
10
with 100 items per page.
- flsd;;0:16-cv-60004_de27 RegisterActionDate "2016-04-20" @default.
- flsd;;0:16-cv-60004_de27 RegisterActionDescriptionText "ORDER GRANTING by default 14 Plaintiff's Motion to Strike Defendants' Affirmative Defenses. On March 1, 2016, Defendants filed their 10 Answer and Affirmative Defenses, which contains eight affirmative defenses, a purported reservation of the "right to amend or supplement these affirmative defenses," and a demand for dismissal with prejudice of the complaint and an award of attorneys' fees and costs to defense counsel. On March 22, 2016, Plaintiff filed the instant 14 Motion to Strike, in which it seeks to strike Defendants' (1) affirmative defenses, (2) purported reservation of right to amend or supplement the affirmative defenses, and (3) the demand for attorneys' fees and costs to defense counsel. Pursuant to the Local Rules for the Southern District of Florida, Defendants' Response to the Motion was due April 8, 2016. See L.R. S.D. Fla. 7.1(c)(1)(A). Local Rule 7.1(c) provides that failure to timely serve an opposing memorandum of law "may be deemed sufficient cause for granting the motion by default."On April 7, 2016, Defendants moved for an extension of time to respond to Plaintiff's Motion; they requested until March 15, 2016, to respond. (See D.E. 18 .) The Court denied the motion without prejudice because that date had already passed. (D.E. 19.)On April 11, 2016, Defendants filed a second motion for extension of time to respond to Plaintiff's Motion. (See D.E. 21 .) The Court granted that Motion the same day, providing Defendants until and including April 15, 2016 to respond to the Motion. (D.E. 22.)On April 15, 2016, Defendants filed a third motion for extension of time to respond to Plaintiff's Motion. (See D.E. 24 .) The Court notes that this Motion for an extension of a deadline was filed after business hours on the date of the deadline. The Court nevertheless granted the Motion, providing Defendants until and including April 19, 2016 to respond to the Motion.On April 19, 2016, Defendants filed a document titled "Defendants' Response to Plaintiff's Motion to Strike Certain Affirmative Defenses." (See D.E. 26 .) The body of that document reads, in its entirety: "Defendants respectfully request time up and through May 5, 2016 to amend Defendants' Answer to specifically address Plaintiff's Motion to Strike certain affirmative defenses." (Id. at 1.) Defendants' Response is no response at all, and the deadline to file a response has now passed. Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff's Motion to Strike Defendants' Affirmative Defenses is GRANTED BY DEFAULT pursuant to Local Rule 7.1(c) for Defendants' failure to timely file a memorandum in opposition to the Motion. This entry constitutes the ENDORSED ORDER in its entirety. Signed by Judge Joan A. Lenard on 4/20/2016. (gie) (Entered: 04/20/2016)" @default.
- flsd;;0:16-cv-60004_de27 AdministrativeID "27" @default.
- flsd;;0:16-cv-60004_de27 OntologyLabel order @default.
- flsd;;0:16-cv-60004_de27 hasReferenceToOtherEntry flsd;;0:16-cv-60004_de13 @default.
- flsd;;0:16-cv-60004_de27 hasReferenceToOtherEntry flsd;;0:16-cv-60004_de17 @default.
- flsd;;0:16-cv-60004_de27 hasReferenceToOtherEntry flsd;;0:16-cv-60004_de20 @default.
- flsd;;0:16-cv-60004_de27 hasReferenceToOtherEntry flsd;;0:16-cv-60004_de24 @default.
- flsd;;0:16-cv-60004_de27 hasReferenceToOtherEntry flsd;;0:16-cv-60004_de26 @default.
- flsd;;0:16-cv-60004_de27 hasReferenceToOtherEntry flsd;;0:16-cv-60004_de9 @default.