Opinion
Civil No. 10-cv-214-JL
08-16-2011
PROCEDURAL ORDER
The plaintiff's "motion to compel production of documents and to amend the joint discovery plan" (document no. 59) is STRICKEN for its failure to comply with this court's Order After Preliminary Pretrial Conference (document no. 52). That order sets forth an informal procedure for resolving discovery disputes and provides that "[c]ustomary motions to compel, while disfavored, . . . are nonetheless permissible . . . . [A]ny such motion should expressly request, in the title of the motion, a referral to the United States Magistrate Judge." The plaintiff's motion contains no such request. It is therefore stricken without prejudice to the plaintiff's either (1) seeking the relief through the informal procedure set forth in the preliminary pretrial order (which, again, is this court's preferred method) or (2) refiling the motion so that it complies with the order.
SO ORDERED.
Joseph N. Laplante
United States District Judge
cc: Rachel A. Rubenson, Esq.
Sara Gutierrez Dunn, Esq.
Annmarie A. Tenn, Esq.
Joan A. Lukey, Esq.
John P. O'Flanagan, Esq.
L. Robert Bourgeois, Esq.
Brian M. Quirk, Esq.
James C. Wheat, Esq.
Phillip S. Bixby, Esq.
Martha C. Gaythwaite, Esq.