Opinion
No. CV-05-876-PHX-FJM.
June 5, 2006
ORDER
In our Order dated May 19, 2006, we granted defendant's motion for summary judgment, denied plaintiff's motion for declaratory judgment, denied as moot defendant's motion to strike the motion for declaratory judgment, and denied as moot defendant's motion for summary adjudication of its motion for summary judgment (doc. 26). We now have before us a document entitled "Plaintiff's Request Motion of Denial of Defendant's Motion to Strike" (doc. 29). This appears to be either a belated response to defendant's motion to strike or a belated motion to strike defendant's motion to strike. At either event, it is moot because we denied defendant's motion to strike. It could also be interpreted as a motion for reconsideration of our order granting defendant's motion for summary judgment. In that event, it is denied because it sets forth no reason to reconsider our decision.
We also have before us a document entitled "Plaintiff's Request for Relief of Order/Judgement" (doc. 28). This is an objection to defendant's bill of costs and will be considered by the Clerk of Court when assessing costs pursuant to Rule 54(d)(1), Fed.R.Civ.P., and LRCiv 54.1. It is also a motion for relief pursuant to Rule 60(b), Fed.R.Civ.P., and is denied because it sets forth no reason for relief; it merely asserts that we should not assess costs because plaintiff filed for bankruptcy. It is also a motion for relief pursuant to Rule 55(c), Fed.R.Civ.P., and is denied because there was no entry of default and therefore Rule 55(c) is inapplicable.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED DENYING plaintiff's motions (docs. 28 and 29).