Case 1:15-cv-07433-LAP BOIES Document 290 SCHILLER 401 EAST LAS OLAS BOULEVARO• 5UVIR „.;;L: • hi & Filed 07/18/16 Page 1 of 4 FLEXNER _AUL:ERZ:ALE, FL 3330i 22 • PH 954 356.00 LLP • FAX 954 356.0022 Meredith =, Esq. Email: mschuliAbsillp.com July 18, 2016 Via CM/ECF Honorable Judge Robert W. Sweet District Court Judge United States District Court 500 Pearl Street New York, NY 10007 Re: v. Maxwell, Case No. 15-cv-07433-RWS Dear Judge Sweet: This letter is a response in opposition to Defendant's improper letter motion to strike Plaintiff Motion for an Adverse Inference Instruction Pursuant to Rule 37(B), (E), and (F), Fed. R. Civ. P. First, the instant motion is procedurally improper, as Rule 12(O, Fed. R. Civ. P., permits pleadings to be stricken - not motions. See Huelbig v. Aurora Loan Services, LLC, 2011 WL 4348281, at *2 (S.D.N.Y.,2011) ("Plaintiff's Motion to Strike is improper because Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f) allows a court to strike pleadings only . . . motions, declarations, and affidavits are not pleadings."); Del Col v. Rice, 2014 WL 1834983, at *9 (E.D.N.Y. May 7, 2014) (denying motion to strike portions of memorandum of law as procedurally improper because it was not a "pleading"); 2 James Wm. Moore et. al., Moores Federal Practice § 12.37[2] (3d ed. 2004) ("Motions, briefs, or memoranda ... may not be attacked by the motion to strike."). Second, counsel did attempt to meet and confer regarding the underlying issue, by sending a detailed letter specifically asking counsel for defendant whether they objected to any terms and whether she thought different terms would be appropriate.' Defendant's counsel's failure to respond to that request for conference (and failure to respond to the followup letter) addressing these issues, is part of what made filing the motion for an adverse inference necessary. Defendant's wholesale failure to produce any documents by the deadline pursuant to this Court's Order and complete failure to req