Oak Harbor Inv. Props. v. Sedona Corp.

Full title: OAK HARBOR INVESTMENT PROPERTIES, L.L.C. v. SEDONA CORPORATION

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

Date published: Apr 28, 2021

CIVIL ACTION 20-844-SDD-RLB (M.D. La. Apr. 28, 2021)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION 20-844-SDD-RLB

04-28-2021

OAK HARBOR INVESTMENT PROPERTIES, L.L.C. v. SEDONA CORPORATION

CHIEF JUDGE SHELLY D. DICK UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

RULING

This matter is before the Court on the Motion for Summary Judgment ¹ filed by Plaintiff, Oak Harbor Investment Properties, L.L.C. ("Oak Harbor"). Local rule 7(f) of the Middle District of Louisiana requires that memoranda in opposition to a motion be filed within twenty-one (21) days after service of the motion. Despite this rule, Defendant Sedona Corporation ("Sedona") has failed to timely oppose this motion, which was electronically filed on March 12, 2021. Under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules of Court, Sedona was required to file an opposition no later than April 2, 2021. Therefore, the pending motion is deemed to be unopposed and further, after reviewing the record, the Court finds that the Motion has merit, particularly because Oak Harbor's Statement of Undisputed Facts ² is uncontroverted, and the summary judgment evidence submitted supports Oak Harbor's arguments.

1 Rec. Doc. No. 15.

2 Rec. Doc. No. 15-8.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Oak Harbor's Motion for Summary Judgment ³ is GRANTED.

3 Rec. Doc. No. 15. --------

Any response to this Ruling, which should explain the Defendant's failure to comply with the Court's deadlines, based on the appropriate Federal Rule of Civil Procedure, shall be filed within fourteen (14) days and must be accompanied by an opposition memorandum to the original Motion.

Signed in Baton Rouge, Louisiana the 28^th day of April, 2021.

/s/ _________

CHIEF JUDGE SHELLY D. DICK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA