Opinion
Case Number 04-20038-BC.
January 5, 2006
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE
On December 21, 2005, the defendant filed a motion in limine. E.D. Mich. LR 7.1(a) requires a movant to seek concurrence in the relief requested before filing a motion with this Court. If concurrence is obtained, the parties then may present a stipulated order to the Court. If concurrence is not obtained, Local Rule 7.1(a)(2) requires that the moving party state in the motion that "there was a conference between the attorneys . . . in which the movant explained the nature of the motion and its legal basis and requested but did not obtain concurrence in the relief sought [] or . . . despite reasonable efforts specified in the motion, the movant was unable to conduct a conference." E.D. Mich. LR 7.1(a)(2).
The defendant does not state in his motion that concurrence was sought in the relief requested before filing the motion. "It is not up to the Court to expend its energies when the parties have not sufficiently expended their own." Hasbro, Inc. v. Serafino, 168 F.R.D. 99, 101 (D. Mass. 1996). The defendant has filed his motion in violation of the applicable rules.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the defendant's motion in limine [dkt # 172] is DENIED without prejudice.