Legal Opinion

HP Tuners, LLC v. Cannata

District Court, D. Nevada

Decided July 9, 2021No. 3:18-cv-00527Unknown

1Opinion

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 Case No.: 3:18-cv-00527-LRH-WGC HP TUNERS, LLC., 4 Order Plaintiff 5 Re: ECF No. 110 v. 6 KENNETH CANNATA., 7 Defendant 8 9 Before the court is Plaintiff HP Tuners, LLC (“HPT”) Motion for Sanctions against 10 Defendant Kenneth Cannata (“Cannata”). (ECF No. 110). Cannata filed a Response. 11 (ECF No. 115). HPT filed a Reply. (ECF No. 117). 12 HPT’s Motion for Sanctions is brought in part under Federal Rule 37(c)(2). 13 (ECF No. 110, 13-14). Federal Rule 37 (c)(2) states, “If a party fails to admit what is requested 14 under Rule 36 and if…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Cooper v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1990
  2. Chemical Engineering Corporation and John O. McLean v. Essef Industries, Inc. And Willard StutzmanCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1986
  3. A & V Fishing, Inc. v. Home InsuranceDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1993
  4. Joseph v. FratarDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 2000

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API