UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JACKSONVILLE DIVISION

ANTONIO TANKSLEY,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 3:24-cv-1068-HES-SJH

ANTHONY PENNINGTON, et al.,

Defendants. ________________________________/

ORDER THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendants’ Second Motion to Compel Discovery Responses and Incorporated Memorandum of Law (“Motion”), filed on May 21, 2025. Doc. 34.1 The Motion asserts that Plaintiff objected to certain discovery requests relating to employment, income tax, and financial records, on the grounds that Plaintiff was not bringing a lost wage or loss of earning capacity claim, but that Plaintiff subsequently testified (and his counsel confirmed) that he was making a lost wage claim. Doc. 34 at 2. The Motion generally represents that, following Plaintiff’s confirmation of his pursuit of a lost wage claim, counsel for Plaintiff has indicated that the originally withheld discovery would be provided but, despite multiple requests, it has not. Id. at 2-3, 7.

1 After the Court originally struck it, Doc. 35, the corrected and redacted exhibit to the Motion was refiled on May 27, 2025, Doc. 36; 36-2. Plaintiff has not responded to the Motion and the deadline for doing so has passed. See Local Rule 3.01(c). Accordingly, the Motion may be treated as unopposed. See id.; Sapp v. Marcum, No. 6:21-cv-1515-PGB-DCI,

,

at *1 (M.D. Fla. May 31, 2024) (“The Court routinely grants motions as unopposed where the opposing parties have not filed a response in opposition to the motion.”); United States v. Orlando Heart & Vascular Ctr., LLC, No. 6:19-cv-1884-CEM-DCI,

, at *1 (M.D. Fla. Jan. 18, 2023) (same); see also Slingshot Env’t LLC v.

Sound Strategic Sols., LLC, No. 6:23-cv-915-WWB-RMN,

, at *1 (M.D. Fla. Mar. 21, 2024); Turner v. Nat’l Fire & Marine Ins. Co., No. 6:23-cv-580- RBD-LHP,

, at *1 (M.D. Fla. July 10, 2023). The Court will therefore grant the Motion as unopposed and direct Plaintiff to provide the discovery requested in the Motion.2

Accordingly, it is ORDERED: 1. The Motion (Doc. 34) is granted. 2. Within fourteen (14) days of the date of this Order, Plaintiff must serve on Defendant (but not file with the Court): a. complete responses, verified under oath, to Defendants’

Interrogatories 3 and 13; and

2 Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(5) applies to an award of expenses as to the Motion. The Motion does not seek any expense award or other relief, Doc. 34 at 6, and the Court thus declines to award any further relief at this time, see Grossman v. Oliver, No. 6:23-cv-1804- RBD-LHP,

, at *1 n.1 (M.D. Fla. June 6, 2024); Orlando Heart & Vascular Ctr.,

, at *1. b. all documents in his possession, custody, or control, responsive to Defendants’ Requests for Production 1, 9, and 17. DONE AND ORDERED in Jacksonville, Florida, on June 18, 2025.

[Z J. Horovitz United States Magistrate Judge Copies to: Counsel of Record