IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND. AARON WALKER ) Plaintiff } ve Case No. 398855-V BRETT KIMBERLIN, ef wx. } Defendant ; ORDER TO STRIKE Finding chronic service disputes between the parties, the Court, on March 21, 2016, entered an Order requiring all parties to (1) serve all filings in this metter by certified mail with return receipt requested; and (2) file the return receipt with Court. The Court informed the parties that it would strike any filings thet did not comply with the Order (see Dt, Nos. 111 & 117) Upon a review of the record in this matter, the Court finds that Defendants have failed to comply with the March 21, 2016 Order, Although the Defendants did file three return receipts for July 2016 on August 8, 2016 (Dkt. No. 210), and one return receipt for June 2016 on July 11, 2016 (Dit No. 172), itis impossible for the Court to determine which retum receipt corresponds to which filing. Additionally, in Defendants’ certificate of service for their July 13, 2016 motion for protective order (Dkt. No. 177), Defendant Brett Kimberlin certifies only that he emailed a copy of the motion to the Plaintiff. Accordingly, itis this @BrdQday of August, 2016, hereby ORDERED that Defendants’ Answer to Plaintiff Walker’s Complaint (Dkt. No. 163) ENTERED AUG 292016, Clerk of the Circuit Court Montgomery County: Md, be STRICKEN; and it is furtherORDERED that Defendants’ Response to Plaintiff's Renewed Request for an Order of Default (Dkt. No. 170) be STRICKEN; and it is further ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion for Protective Order from Discovery (Dkt. No. 177) and the Defendants’ reply to the opposition thereto (Dit, No. 187) be STRICKEN; and it is further ORDERED that Defendants’ Verified Motion for Immediate Sanctions and Costs for Failure of Plaintiff to Attend Deposition (Dit. No. 186) be STRICKEN; and it is further ORDERED that Defendants’ Second Motion for Immediate Sanctions against Plaimift for Intentionally Refusing to Comply with Discovery (Dkt. No. 188); and it is further ORDERED that Defendants’ Reply to Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment Re Defendant Tetyana Kimberlin (Dit. No. 195); and it is further ORDERED that Defendants’ Response to Plaintiff's (1) Motion to File Discovery Sanctions, and (2) Motion to Declare Certain Matters Admitted and Defendant's Motion to Strike Plaintiff's Discovery Filings (Dkt. Nos. 196, 197 & 198) be STRICKEN; and it is further ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Quash Deposition of Defendant Tetyana Kimberlin (Dkt. No. 202) be STRICKEN; and itis further ORDERED that Defendant” Reply to Plaintiff's Opposition to Defendants’ Motion for Sanctions and for Failure to Attend Deposition and Response to Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Sanctions (Dt, Nos. 203 & 204) be STRICKEN; and itis further ORDERED that Defendants’ Reply to Plaintiff's Opposition to Discovery Sanctions ENTERED AUG 292018, Clerk of the Circuit Court Montgomery County, Md. (DMM. No. 207) be STRICKEN; and it is further 2ORDERED that Defendants’ Notification that the State’s Attorney Nolle Prossed Criminal Charges Plaintiff Filed Against Defendants (Dkt, No. 208) be STRICKEN; and itis further ORDERED that Defendant's Response to Motion for Summary Judgment Re Brett Kimberlin and Tetyana Kimberlin (Dit, No. 226) be STRICKEN; and it is further ORDERED that Defendants’ Second Motion for Protective Order to Quash Subpeonas (Dkt. No. 228) be STRICKEN; and it is further ORDERED that to the extent that any motion and/or opposition is properly served and is ripe for ruling by Friday, September 30, 2016, argument on that motion(s) shall be heard on that day at 1:30 p.m. before this member of the bench. MICHAEL D. Tice Judge’ Circuit Court for Montgomery County, MD ENTERED AUG 262016 Clerk of tre Circuit Court Montgomery County, Md.