Killam v. Air and Liquid Systems, Inc. et al

Middle District of Florida, flmd-8:2016-cv-02915

ORDER: In the instance that Plaintiff opposes Defendants' Motions to Dismiss (Doc. ## {{37}}, {{38}}, {{39}}, {{40}}, {{41}}, {{53}}, {{56}}, {{57}}, {{65}}), Plaintiff is directed to file responses in opposition to the Motions by November 17, 2016. Failure to do so will result in the Court deeming the Motions to be unopposed Motions. Signed by Judge Virginia M. Hernandez Covington on 11/14/2016. (KAK)

Interested in this case?

Current View

Full Text

PageID 2204 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION MARC KILLAM, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 8:16-cv-2915-T-33TBM AIR AND LIQUID SYSTEMS, INC., ET AL., Defendants. ________________________________/ ORDER This matter is before the Court pursuant to the following pending motions: Air and Liquid Systems Corporation's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 37), filed October 17, 2016; Aurora Pump Company's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 38), filed October 17, 2016; IMO Industries, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 39), filed on October 17, 2016; Velan Valve Corp.'s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 40), filed on October 17, 2016; Warren Pumps, LLC's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 41), filed on October 17, 2016; Crane Co.'s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 53), filed on October 18, 2016; Goulds Pumps, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 56), filed on October 18, 2016; Electrolux Home Products, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 57), filed on October 18, 2016, and Strahman Valves, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 65), filed on October 20, 2016. PageID 2205 Plaintiff, Marc Killam, failed to file a response in opposition to the Motions within the time parameters of the Local Rules. Local Rule 3.01(b), M.D. Fla., explains, "Each party opposing a motion or application shall file within fourteen (14) days after service of the motion or application a response that includes a memorandum of legal authority in opposition to the request, all of which the respondent shall include in a document not more than twenty (20) pages." Accordingly, on the present record, this Court considers the aforementioned Motions as unopposed by Plaintiff. However, in the instance that Plaintiff does, in fact, oppose any of the Motions, Plaintiff is directed to file his responses in opposition to the Motions by November 17, 2016. Absent a response by Plaintiff, however, this Court will be inclined to grant the Motions as unopposed. Accordingly, it is ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED: In the instance that Plaintiff opposes Defendants' aforementioned pending Motions to Dismiss (Doc. ## 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 53, 56, 57, 65), Plaintiff is directed to file responses in opposition to the Motions by November 17, 2016. Failure to do so will result in the Court deeming the Motions to be unopposed Motions. -2- PageID 2206 DONE and ORDERED in Chambers, in Tampa, Florida, this 14th day of November, 2016. -3-