UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION

5240 PROFESSIONAL CENTER, LLC,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No: 6:24-cv-124-CEM-LHP

WESTCHESTER SURPLUS LINES INSURANCE COMPANY,

Defendant

ORDER Before the Court is Defendant Westchester Surplus Lines Insurance Company’s Short-Form Motion to Compel Subpoena Response and for Sanctions. Doc. No. 25. The motion concerns a third-party subpoena for the production of documents issued to Charles A. Von Stein, Inc. (“Von Stein”) and served on December 13, 2024. Doc. Nos. 25-1, 25-2; see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 45. The deadline for compliance was January 10, 2025. Doc. No. 25-1, at 1. On February 13, 2025, Defendant was advised that Plaintiff’s counsel represents Von Stein, and on February 18, 2025, was informed that Plaintiff’s counsel would respond to the subpoena on Von Stein’s behalf. Doc. No. 25-3, at 1; Doc. No. 25-4, at 1. While Plaintiff’s counsel stated they were “working on it” on a few occasions, no response to the subpoena has been served to date. Doc. No. 25, at 3, Doc. Nos. 25-6, at 1, Doc. No. 25-7. So, Defendant seeks an order compelling the subpoenaed documents, and an award of sanctions. Doc. No. 25, at 3–4.

Von Stein did not respond to the motion, and the time for doing so expired on March 24, 2025. See Doc. No. 12 ¶ 5 (providing that opposition briefing to a discovery motion must be filed no later than five days after the motion). Accordingly, the Court deems the motion to be unopposed in all respects. See id.

(stating that failure to file a timely response will result in the discovery motion being deemed unopposed); see also Westchester Surplus Lines Ins. Co. v. Paramount Disaster Recovery, LLC, No. 6:18-cv-1738-Orl-37DCI,

, at *1 (M.D. Fla. Apr.

19, 2019) (“The Court routinely grants motions as unopposed where the opposing parties have not filed a response in opposition to the motion.”); Bercini v. City of Orlando, No. 6:15-cv-1921-Orl-41TBS,

, at *2 (M.D. Fla. Sept. 28, 2016) (granting in full unopposed motion to compel); Daisy, Inc. v. Pollo Operations,

Inc., No. 2:14-cv-564-FtM-38CM,

, at *1 (M.D. Fla. May 14, 2015) (when defendant did not respond court could consider motion to compel unopposed).

Upon review of the unopposed motion, as well as the attached subpoena and communications amongst the parties, the Court finds the motion well taken, for the most part. However, to the extent that Defendant seeks fees and costs as a sanction, the motion will be denied, as Defendant provides no legal authority supporting that request with regard to a Rule 45 subpoena. Cf. Golden Krust Franchising, Inc. v. Clayborne, No. 8:20-mc-104-T-33SPF,

, at *2

(M.D. Fla. Dec. 10, 2020) (“[U]nlike Rule 37, Rule 45 contains no express provision for attorneys’ fees or sanctions to a party that has prevailed on a motion to compel compliance with a subpoena. . . .” (citation omitted)). Accordingly, it is ORDERED as follows:

1. Westchester Surplus Lines Insurance Company’s Short-Form Motion to Compel Subpoena Response and for Sanctions (Doc. No. 25) is GRANTED in part.

2. On or before April 9, 2025, Von Stein shall fully comply with the Subpoena to Produce Documents. See Doc. No. 25-1, at 1, 4–7. 3. All objections to the production required by the subpoena have been waived. See Cadle v. GEICO Gen. Ins. Co., No. 6:13-cv-1591-Orl-31GJK,

, at *3 (M.D. Fla. Aug. 29, 2014) (“Typically, failure to serve written objections to a subpoena in the time provided by [Rule 45] waives any objections that party may have.”); see also Gulati v. Ormond Beach Hosp.,

LLC, No. 6:18-cv-920-Orl-37TBS,

, at *2 (M.D. Fla. Dec. 17, 2018) (“When a party fails to respond to discovery, or provides untimely responses, whatever objections it might otherwise have had are generally deemed waived.” (citations omitted)). 4. Failure to comply with this Order may result in the institution of contempt proceedings against Von Stein. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(g). 5. Westchester Surplus Lines Insurance Company’s Short-Form Motion to Compel Subpoena Response and for Sanctions (Doc. No. 25) is DENIED in all other respects. DONE and ORDERED in Orlando, Florida on March 26, 2025.

LESLIE 3 AN PRICE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Copies furnished to: Counsel of Record Unrepresented Parties

_4-