United States District Court, E.D. Tennessee, Knoxville
October 6, 2014
JACK F. BRAKEBILL, et al., Plaintiffs,
HERBERT MONCIER, ESQ., et al., Defendants.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
C. CLIFFORD SHIRLEY, Jr., Magistrate Judge.
This case is before the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Rules of this Court, and Standing Order 13-02.
Now before the Court is Defendant Herbert Moncier's Motion to Compel Plaintiffs Jack F. Brakebill and Donna Brakebill to Permit Rule 34 Inspection of Requested Documents [Doc. 103]. In his motion, Mr. Moncier moves the Court "to compel Jack F. Brakebill and Donna Brakebill permit inspection of documents prior to their depositions on August 4th and 5th respectively." [Id. at 1].
As indicated in Mr. Moncier's motion, the depositions of Jack Brakebill and Donna Brakebill were scheduled to take place on August 4, 2014, and August 5, 2014. [See Doc. 101]. No party has filed a notice stating that these depositions did not take place. Thus, the Court finds that the depositions at which Mr. Moncier seeks to have production made appear to have already been taken. The Court further finds that August 4 and August 5, 2014, the dates on which Mr. Moncier sought to have production take place, have already passed.
Accordingly, the Court finds that the Motion to Compel [Doc. 103] is now moot, and it is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, to allow refiling, if appropriate, following disposition of the Motion for Entry of Protective Order [Doc. 85] and Motion to Bifurcate Discovery [Doc. 86].
Because the Motion to Compel is denied as moot, the Court finds that Mr. Moncier's Motion to Revise Order [Doc. 178], which moves the Court to send notice setting the Motion to Compel for hearing on October 9, 2014, is also moot. Therefore, Mr. Moncier's Motion to Revise Order [Doc. 178] is also DENIED AS MOOT.
IT IS SO ORDERED.