Calvin v. IC Systems Inc

CourtDistrict Court, W.D. Oklahoma
DecidedMay 21, 2021
Docket5:21-cv-00127
StatusUnknown

This text of Calvin v. IC Systems Inc (Calvin v. IC Systems Inc) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Oklahoma primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Calvin v. IC Systems Inc, (W.D. Okla. 2021).

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

SAQUANNA CALVIN, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Case No. CIV-21-00127-JD ) IC SYSTEMS INC., and ) KANSAS COUNSELORS INC. ) ) Defendants. )

ORDER SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE

Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike the Affirmative Defenses in I.C. System, Inc.’s Answer (“Motion”) [Doc. No. 14], seeking to strike defenses asserted by Defendant I.C. System, Inc. (“Defendant”). Under LCvR7.1(g), this matter is set for an expedited briefing schedule. The Court notes that motions to strike affirmative defenses are generally disfavored, United States v. Hardage, 116 F.R.D. 460, 462 (W.D. Okla. 1987), and it appears that the parties should be able to work cooperatively to overcome such disputes without Court intervention. In sum, the Court expects the parties to confer and resolve this dispute. Accordingly, the Court is requiring counsel for the parties to confer telephonically in good faith regarding the matters presented in the Motion before any response brief is filed to determine if the parties can reach an agreement on the Motion without Court involvement. If any agreement is reached and includes Defendant filing an amended answer, Defendant shall move to amend its answer by June 7, 2021, following the applicable federal and local rules, and shall indicate if the amendment is opposed or unopposed. Any unopposed motion should include a proposed order. If the parties do not resolve their dispute, any response brief by Defendant shall be filed on or before June 7, 2021. The Defendant shall include within its response brief a certificate of conference indicating the date, time, and length of the conference between counsel for the parties, who attended the conference, what resolutions were reached between the parties, and what issues remain to be resolved by the Court. If the parties resolve any aspects of the Motion but not the entire Motion, Defendant shall clearly state those resolutions in its response brief. Any reply brief (to address new information only) by Plaintiff must be filed no later than June 11, 2021. A reply, if filed, is limited to five pages. If the parties are unable to fully resolve the issues in the Motion, the Court will either rule on the submitted briefs or set a hearing if it determines that one is necessary. IT IS SO ORDERED this 21st day of May 2021.

ads lf UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. Hardage
116 F.R.D. 460 (W.D. Oklahoma, 1987)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Calvin v. IC Systems Inc, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/calvin-v-ic-systems-inc-okwd-2021.