Paulo Oliveira v. American Airlines, Inc.

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION

PAULO OLIVEIRA,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No: 6:25-cv-1133-CEM-LHP

AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC.,

Defendant

ORDER Before the Cout is Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Supplemental Discovery Responses and Production of Documents. Doc. No. 57. On review, the motion is DENIED without prejudice for failure to comply with the Standing Order on Discovery Motions. See Doc. No. 54. First, the motion exceeds the word limitations for a discovery motion. See id. ¶ 2. Second, the motion fails to attach the discovery requests and responses at issue. See id. ¶ 3. Third, the motion suggests (by Local Rule 3.01(g) conferral improperly imbedded in the middle of the motion and by attachment, see Local Rule 3.01(g)(2), Doc. No. 57, at 3; Doc. No. 57- 2), that the parties conferred solely via email. See id. ¶ 1. Any renewed motion must comply in full with the Standing Order on Discovery Motions (Doc. No. 54) and all applicable Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rules. See also Moon v. Newsome, 863 F.2d 835, 837 (11th Cir. 1989), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 863 (1989) (pro se litigants are “subject to the relevant law and rules of court, including the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure”). DONE and ORDERED in Orlando, Florida on February 6, 2026.

LESLIE 3 AN PRICE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Copies furnished to: Counsel of Record Unrepresented Parties