DISTRICT COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS
DIVISION OF ST. CROIX
5
KARIM ROBLES,
5
5
Plaintiff,
5
2006-CV-0133
v.
5
5
HESS CORPORATION,
5
5
Defendant.
5
________________________________________________5
TO:
Lee J. Rohn, Esq.
C. Beth Moss, Esq.
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPEL
THIS MATTER came before the Court upon Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Complete
Discovery Responses (Docket No. 24).  Defendant filed a response to said motion.  This
order is issued without necessity of a reply.
Plaintiff alleges that Defendant failed to respond to his discovery requests despite
an extension granted by Plaintiff and a promise by Defendant to have such responses
completed by August 12, 2008.  Defendant states that it now has served its responses to
Plaintiff’s discovery requests and enumerates its reasons for the delay.
The Court notes that the parties failed to submit a joint stipulation pursuant LRCi
37.2(a).  As the Court has ruled in previous matters discovery motions that fail to comply
Case: 1:06-cv-00133-RLF-GWC   Document #: 28   Filed: 10/08/08   Page 1 of 2
Robles v. Hess Corporation
2006-CV-0133
Order Denying Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel
Page 2
with the requirements of LRCi 37.2(a) will not be considered pursuant to LRCi 37.2(c). 
However, because the motion currently before the Court is moot, the Court merely will
deny the motion.
Accordingly, it is now hereby ORDERED Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Complete
Discovery Responses (Docket No. 24) is DENIED AS MOOT.
ENTER:
Dated: October 8, 2008
                                /s/                                    
GEORGE W. CANNON, JR.
U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Case: 1:06-cv-00133-RLF-GWC   Document #: 28   Filed: 10/08/08   Page 2 of 2