1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO.: 0:22-CV-61553-DIMITROULEAS/HUNT

CRUZ VALDIVIESO FIGUERA, 

Plaintiff,

vs. 

ALL VIP CARE INC. AND 

LIZ VELAZQUEZ MCKINNON,

Defendants.

______________________________/ 

ORDER

 THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon the Court’s careful consideration of Defendants’ 

Motion for Summary Judgment [DE 51] and Defendants’ Statement of Undisputed Material 

Facts in Support of its Motion for Summary Judgment [DE 52] (“DSOF”). The Court is 

otherwise fully advised in the premises. 

First, Local Rule 7.1(c)(2) states: 

Length. Absent prior permission of the Court, neither a motion and its 

incorporated memorandum of law nor the opposing memorandum of law shall 

exceed twenty (20) pages; a reply memorandum shall not exceed ten (10) pages. 

S.D. Fla. L.R. 7.1(c)(2). Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment is approximately 

twenty-one (21) pages long, exceeding the permitted length. 

 Additionally, Local Rule 56.1 states, in part: 

(a) Statements of Material Facts.

(1) A motion for summary judgment and the opposition to it shall each be 

accompanied by a separate and contemporaneously filed and served 

Statement of Material Facts. The movant’s Statement of Material Facts 

shall list the material facts that the movant contends are not genuinely 

Case 0:22-cv-61553-WPD Document 53 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/13/2023 Page 1 of 3
2

disputed.

. . . 

(b) Form Required for Statements of Material Facts.

(1) All Statements of Material Facts. All Statements of Material Facts 

(whether filed by the movant or the opponent) shall be filed and served as 

separate documents and not as exhibits or attachments. In addition, the 

Statements of Material Facts shall:

(A) Not exceed ten (10) pages;

(B) Consist of separately numbered paragraphs, limited as far 

as practicable to a single material fact, with each fact 

supported by specific, pinpoint references to particular parts 

of record material, including depositions, documents, 

electronically stored information, affidavits, stipulations (including 

those made for purposes of the motion only), admissions, and 

interrogatory answers (e.g., Exhibit D, Smith Affidavit, ¶2; Exhibit 

3, Jones deposition, p. 12/lines 4-9).

The pinpoint citations shall reference pages (and line numbers, if 

appropriate, of exhibits, designate the number and title of each 

exhibit, and provide the ECF number of all previously filed 

materials used to support the Statement of Material Facts. When a 

material fact requires specific evidentiary support, a general 

citation to an exhibit without a page number or pincite (e.g., 

“Smith Affidavit” or “Jones Deposition” or “Exhibit A”) is noncompliant. If not already in the record on CM/ECF, the materials 

shall be attached to the statement as exhibits specifically titled 

within the CM/ECF system (e.g., Smith Affidavit dated April 12, 

2017, Jones Deposition dated May 19, 2018). Reference to a 

previously filed exhibit shall use the “ECF No.” format.

S.D. Fla. L.R. 56.1 (emphasis added). “When a party properly complies with Local Rule 56.1, it 

is relatively easy for a court to determine whether there is a genuine disputed issue of fact.” 

Katchmore Luhrs, LLC v. Allianz Glob. Corp. & Specialty, No. 15-CIV-23420, 2017 WL 

201840, at *2 (S.D. Fla. Jan. 18, 2017). Failure to follow the letter and spirt of this imperative 

local rule imposes on the Court “an arduous process, and, in any event, generates unnecessary 

Case 0:22-cv-61553-WPD Document 53 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/13/2023 Page 2 of 3
3

work for the court and its staff.” Id.

In this case, Defendants’ filing does not comply with the criteria nor the spirit of the 

Local Rules. Defendants’ Statement of Undisputed Material Facts [DE 52] is approximately 

twelve (12) pages long, exceeding the permitted length. As written, several of Defendants’ 

asserted facts do not consist of “separately numbered paragraphs, limited as a far as practicable 

to a single material fact.” See, e.g., DSOF ¶¶ 34, 47. Defendants also improperly intermingle 

legal conclusions in at least one of the asserted facts, making it difficult to determine whether 

that asserted fact is actually a fact for purposes of summary judgment. See DSOF ¶ 71. The 

Local Rules specify that “[i]f a party files and serves any Statement of Material Facts that does 

not comply with this rule, then the Court may strike the Statement....” L.R. 56.1(b)(1). 

Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendants’ Motion for 

Summary Judgment [DE 51] and Defendants’ Statement of Undisputed Material Facts in 

Support of its Motion for Summary Judgment [DE 52] are hereby STRICKEN.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Fort Lauderdale, Broward County, Florida, 

this 12th day of July, 2023.

Copies to: 

Counsel of record 

Case 0:22-cv-61553-WPD Document 53 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/13/2023 Page 3 of 3