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’ 

Reply Statement of Material Facts in Support of its Reply to Plaintiff’s Response to Defendants’ 

Amended Motion for Summary Judgment [DE 77]. The Court is otherwise fully advised in the 

premises. 

Defendants’ filing [DE 77] does not comply with criteria set forth in the Local Rules. See 

L.R. 56.1, which states in relevant part as follows: 

(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), 

Case 0:22-cv-61553-WPD Document 78 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/08/2023 Page 1 of 4
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 

non-compliant. 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.

. . . .

(3) Reply Statement of Material Facts.

(A) If an opponent’s Statement of Material Facts includes 

additional facts, then the movant shall respond to each additional 

fact in a separately served Reply Statement of Material Facts.

(B) The Reply Statement of Material Facts shall correspond 

with the order and paragraph numbering format used in the 

opponent’s additional facts, identifying with the very first 

word in each fact as “disputed” or “undisputed” at the 

beginning of each paragraph in the statement, and, if disputed,

citing to particular parts of materials in the record in the same 

manner as required by subsections (b)(1) and (b)(2).

. . . .

(d) Consequences of Non-Compliance. If a party files and serves any Statement of 

Material Facts that does not comply with this rule, then the Court may strike the 

Statement, require immediate compliance, grant relief to any opposing party for 

any prejudice arising from a non-compliant statement or response, or enter other 

sanctions that the Court deems appropriate.

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). 

Case 0:22-cv-61553-WPD Document 78 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/08/2023 Page 2 of 4
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 work for the court and its staff.” Id.

Defendants’ response to Plaintiff’s Additional Facts is inordinately confusing and does 

not comply with criteria nor the spirit of the Local Rules. See L.R. 56.1. Rather, it attempts to 

send the Court down dozens of rabbit holes attempting to determine which of Plaintiff’s asserted 

additional undisputed facts are truly undisputed. Defendants improperly cite to their own

asserted undisputed facts to dispute numerous of Plaintiff’s additional facts, not “evidentiary 

citations” as contemplated by the Rules. See, e.g., [DE 77] at ¶¶ 70, 77, 80, 87, 100.

Compounding the confusion, many of the responses of “undisputed” are then followed with 

commentary that calls into question the validity of the “undisputed” response.1

 See, e.g., [DE 

77] at ¶¶ 70, 74, 80, 87, 101. Accordingly, the Court will strike the filing without prejudice to 

refiling a corrected reply statement of material facts in opposition to Plaintiff’s additional facts.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:

1. Defendants’ Reply Statement of Material Facts in Support of its Reply to 

Plaintiff’s Response to Defendants’ Amended Motion for Summary Judgment 

[DE 77] is hereby STRICKEN.

2. Defendants’ counsel are instructed to carefully study and follow the 

requirements of Local Rule 56.1 and this Order.

3. On or before August 15, 2023, Defendants shall file an amended reply statement 

of material facts in opposition to Plaintiff’s Additional Facts.2 The amended reply 

1 The Court acknowledges that Plaintiff also improperly included commentary after several of her “undisputed” 

responses. See, e.g., [DE 75] at ¶¶ 3, 18. To remedy these non-complaint responses, the Court will ignore any 

additional commentary and argument listed after an “undisputed” response in Plaintiff’s Statement of Material Facts 

in Support of Response to Defendants’ Amended Motion for Summary Judgment [DE 75]. 2 Defendants may also amend their Reply to Plaintiff’s Response to Defendant’s Amended Motion for Summary 

Judgment [DE 76], if necessary.

Case 0:22-cv-61553-WPD Document 78 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/08/2023 Page 3 of 4
statement of facts shall be consistent with the Local Rules and this Order. No 

additional amendments will be provided. Failure to comply may result in the 

Court summarily denying Defendants’ summary judgment motion.

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

8th day of August, 2023.

Copies furnished to:

Counsel of Record

Case 0:22-cv-61553-WPD Document 78 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/08/2023 Page 4 of 4