Cases from cite.case.law:

FIRSTBANK OF PUERTO RICO, v. ROSTA FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, LLC II, LLC v. S. E. De v. S. E., 271 F. Supp. 3d 377 (D.P.R. 2017)

. . . Id. at 41-42; see D.P.L.R. 311.12; see Morales, 246 F.3d at 33 (“This case is a lesson in summary judgment . . . [P]arties ignore [Rule 311.12] at their own peril, [and] ... failure to present a statement of disputed . . .

NAVICO INC. AS, v. INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION, USA,, 696 F. App'x 989 (Fed. Cir. 2017)

. . . from different types of transducers and combines that data into a single display. ’499 patent col. 311.12 . . .

RIVERA, v. PUERTO RICO ELECTRIC POWER AUTHORITY,, 4 F. Supp. 3d 342 (D.P.R. 2014)

. . . Id. at 41-42; see D.P.R.R. 311.12; see Morales, 246 F.3d at 33 (“This case is a lesson in summary judgment . . . [PJarties ignore [Rule 311.12] at their own peril, and ... failure to present a statement of disputed . . .

MARKEL AMERICAN INSURANCE CO. v. VERAS,, 995 F. Supp. 2d 65 (D.P.R. 2014)

. . . Id. at 41^42; see D.P.R.R. 311.12; see Morales, 246 F.3d at 33 (“This case is a lesson in summary judgment . . . practice---- [Pjarties ignore [Rule 311.12] at their own peril, and ... failure to present a statement . . .

CAMPBELL v. PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS, LLP,, 642 F.3d 820 (9th Cir. 2011)

. . . Prof.Code § 5053; American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) Professional Standards § 311.12 . . .

RIOS, v. ALTERNATE CONCEPTS, INC., 755 F. Supp. 2d 368 (D.P.R. 2010)

. . . Serrano-Rodriguez, 360 F.3d 42, 43 (1st Cir.2004) (finding that failure to comply with then Local Rule 311.12 . . .

RAMOS- BORGES, v. PUERTO RICO, PUERTO RICO HEALTH DEPARTMENT,, 740 F. Supp. 2d 262 (D.P.R. 2010)

. . . Puerto Rico Local Rule 56 In this court, Local Rule 56(b), previously Local Rule 311.12, requires a motion . . .

CAMPBELL LLP, v. PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS, LLP, a, 602 F. Supp. 2d 1163 (Bankr. E.D. Cal. 2009)

. . . See, e.g., American Institute of Professional Accountants Professional Standards § 311.12 (Assistants . . .

MONFORT- RODR GUEZ, v. C A. REY- HERN NDEZ,, 599 F. Supp. 2d 127 (D.P.R. 2009)

. . . Serrano-Rodríguez, 360 F.3d 42, 43 (1st Cir.2004) (finding that failure to comply with then Local Rule 311.12 . . .

VELEZ, v. MARRIOTT PR MANAGEMENT, INC., 590 F. Supp. 2d 235 (D.P.R. 2008)

. . . required by this rule, shall be deemed admitted unless properly controverted” in discussing Local Rule 311.12 . . .

MOELLER TEVEZ, v. ALLMERICA FINANCIAL LIFE INSURANCE AND ANNUITY COMPANY,, 534 F. Supp. 2d 253 (D.P.R. 2008)

. . . deem plaintiffs’ objections to the facts as proffered by ALLMERICA defective pursuant to Local Rule 311.12 . . .

TORRES s v. BELLA VISTA HOSPITAL, INC. s, 523 F. Supp. 2d 123 (D.P.R. 2007)

. . . Champion Prods., Inc., 903 F.Supp. 268, 270 (D.P.R.1995) (“Although [failure to comply with Local Rule 311.12 . . .

MIDWEST MEDIA PROPERTY, L. L. C. CTI L. L. C. L. L. C. v. SYMMES TOWNSHIP, OHIO,, 503 F.3d 456 (6th Cir. 2007)

. . . . § 311.12. . . .

MEL NDEZ, v. SAP ANDINA Y DEL CARIBE, C. A., 518 F. Supp. 2d 344 (D.P.R. 2007)

. . . Serrano-Rodríguez, 360 F.3d 42, 43 (1st Cir.2004) (finding that failure to comply with Local Rule 311.12 . . .

DAVILA, v. E. POTTER,, 550 F. Supp. 2d 234 (D.P.R. 2007)

. . . material fact in the record, the District of Puerto Rico has adopted Local Rule 56 (formerly Local Rule 311.12 . . .

THORNTON, LLP, v. FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, v. LLP, v. LLP,, 535 F. Supp. 2d 676 (S.D.W. Va. 2007)

. . . GT Ex. 267 (AU 311.12). . . .

RIVERA ABELLA, v. PUERTO RICO TELEPHONE CO., 470 F. Supp. 2d 86 (D.P.R. 2007)

. . . required by this rule, shall be deemed admitted unless properly controverted” in discussing Local Rule 311.12 . . .

SANCHEZ- FIGUEROA, v. BANCO POPULAR DE PUERTO RICO,, 462 F. Supp. 2d 212 (D.P.R. 2006)

. . . material fact in the record, the District for Puerto Rico has adopted Local Rule 56 (formerly Local Rule 311.12 . . .

CARRASQUILLO, v. PEREIRA- CASTILLO,, 441 F. Supp. 2d 363 (D.P.R. 2006)

. . . material fact in the record, the District for Puerto Rico has adopted Local Rule 56 (formerly Local Rule 311.12 . . .

VALDIZ N, v. RIVERA- HERNANDEZ,, 445 F.3d 63 (1st Cir. 2006)

. . . R. 311.12), corntains translations of pertinent excerpts. . . .

ROYAL SIAM CORPORATION, v. RIDGE,, 424 F. Supp. 2d 338 (D.P.R. 2006)

. . . material fact in the record, the District for Puerto Rico has adopted Local Rule 56 (formerly Local Rule 311.12 . . .

SEGARRA JIMENEZ, v. BANCO POPULAR, INC., 421 F. Supp. 2d 452 (D.P.R. 2006)

. . . Circuit reaffirmed the validity of the well-known anti-ferret rule previously codified in Local Rule 311.12 . . .

MORENO MORALES, v. ICI PAINTS PUERTO RICO INC., 383 F. Supp. 2d 304 (D.P.R. 2005)

. . . required by this rule, shall be deemed admitted unless properly controverted” in discussing Local Rule 311.12 . . .

GENERAL COUNCIL OF ASSEMBLIES OF GOD, v. FRATERNIDAD DE IGLESIA DE ASAMBLEA DE DIOS AUTONOMA HISPANA, INC., 382 F. Supp. 2d 315 (D.P.R. 2005)

. . . Circuit reaffirmed the validity of the well-known anti-ferret rule previously codified in Local Rule 311.12 . . .

A. COL N ORTIZ, v. R. ROSARIO,, 132 F. App'x 847 (1st Cir. 2005)

. . . R. 311.12, because plaintiff failed to oppose defendants’ motion. . . .

D AZ RODR GUEZ, v. TORRES M RTIR,, 394 F. Supp. 2d 389 (D.P.R. 2005)

. . . material fact in the record, the District for Puerto Rico has adopted Local Rule 56 (formerly Local Rule 311.12 . . .

DESIDERIO- ORTIZ, v. FRONTERA- SERRA,, 394 F. Supp. 2d 381 (D.P.R. 2005)

. . . Circuit reaffirmed the validity of the well-known anti-ferret rule previously codified at Local Rule 311.12 . . .

MOR N BARRADA, v. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO,, 368 F. Supp. 2d 137 (D.P.R. 2005)

. . . material fact in the record, the District for Puerto Rico has adopted Local Rule 56 (formerly Local Rule 311.12 . . .

a ALSINA- ORTIZ a v. Zo LABOY C a k a n a k a M a k a a k a Dr. I. M a k a n, 400 F.3d 77 (1st Cir. 2005)

. . . A local rule of the district court (then Rule 311.12, now revised and renumbered as Rule 56) requires . . .

OTERO- VARCALCEL, v. CANTERO- FRAU, I., 124 F. App'x 662 (1st Cir. 2005)

. . . L.R. 311.5, 311.12 (2002) (repealed 2004) (imposing a ten-day response deadline and authorizing the court . . .

GUZM N- ROSARIO, A. P v. UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC., 397 F.3d 6 (1st Cir. 2005)

. . . Rule 311.12, requires that the statements of uncontested and contested issues be specific and supported . . .

NIEVES- LUCIANO v. n HERN NDEZ- TORRES, D D v., 397 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2005)

. . . Local R. 311.12 because their counter-statement of facts did not contain record citations. . . .

MERCADO- ALICEA De v. P. R. TOURISM COMPANY P. R. Mu F. M M T., 396 F.3d 46 (1st Cir. 2005)

. . . summary judgment for defendants upon finding that the plaintiffs had failed to comply with Local Rule 311.12 . . . Local Rule 311.12 According to Local Rule 311.12, a party who moves for summary judgment must .submit . . . D.P.R.R. 311.12. . . . This is precisely the situation that Local Rule 311.12 seeks to avoid.”). . . . See D.P.R.R. 311.12. B. . . .

ALBURQUERQUE, v. FAZ ALZAMORA,, 357 F. Supp. 2d 385 (D.P.R. 2004)

. . . fact in the record, the District for Puerto Rico has adopted Local Rule 56(b) (formerly Local Rule 311.12 . . .

LEON v. M. SANCHEZ- BERMUDEZ, 332 F. Supp. 2d 407 (D.P.R. 2004)

. . . At the time of the filing of the Opposition for Summary Judgment, Local Rule 311.12, was the equivalent . . .

V LEZ a k a V a k a V v. AWNING WINDOWS, INC., 375 F.3d 35 (1st Cir. 2004)

. . . See D.P.R.R. 311.12; see also Euromodas, Inc. v. Zanella, Ltd., 368 F.3d 11, 14-15 (1st Cir.2004). . . .

EUROMODAS, INC. v. ZANELLA, LTD., 368 F.3d 11 (1st Cir. 2004)

. . . Id. at 204 n. 5 (discussing D.P.R.R. 311.12). This appeal followed. . . . This inquiry centers on D.P.R.R. 311.12. . . . D.P.R.R. 311.12. . . . Rules such as Local Rule 311.12 were adopted pursuant to a suggestion of this court, see Stepanischen . . . See D.P.R.R. 311.12. . . .

COSME- ROSADO v. SERRANO- RODRIGUEZ, As C, 360 F.3d 42 (1st Cir. 2004)

. . . . § 1367(c), upon finding that the landowners had failed to comply with Local Rule 311.12 and had therefore . . . The landowners now challenge the court’s application of Rule 311.12. We affirm. I. . . . D.P.L.R. 311.12. See Pedro Cosme-Rosado v. Alfredo Serrno-Rodriguez, 196 F.Supp.2d 117, 119 (D.P.R. . . . D.P.L.R. 311.12. . . . This is precisely the situation that Local Rule 311.12 seeks to avoid.”). . . .

CARABALLO SEDA, s v. JAVIER RIVERA, s, 306 F. Supp. 2d 108 (D.P.R. 2004)

. . . Defendants refer to Local Rule 311.12, replaced by Rule 56 upon the adoption of the new Local Rules on . . .

SANDOVAL DIAZ, v. J. SANDOVAL OROZCO,, 296 F. Supp. 2d 122 (D.P.R. 2003)

. . . The Court notes that all parties have complied with Local Rule 56, formerly Local Rule 311.12. . . .

THE EQUITABLE LIFE ASSURANCE SOCIETY OF THE UNITED STATES, v. SOFTEX PRODUCTS, INC. P. R., 78 F. App'x 727 (1st Cir. 2003)

. . . the uncontested material facts submitted by Equitable because Softex failed to comply with Local Rule 311.12 . . . Softex did not, however, attach a statement of uncontested material facts as required by Local Rule 311.12 . . .

A. REYES CA ADA, v. REY HERNANDEZ,, 286 F. Supp. 2d 174 (D.P.R. 2003)

. . . The Court notes that all parties have complied with Local Rule 311.12, which has recently been renumbered . . .

ALSINA ORTIZ, s v. LABOY, s, 286 F. Supp. 2d 133 (D.P.R. 2003)

. . . LOCAL RULE 311.12 In compliance with Local Rule 311.12, defendants submitted “a separate, short concise . . . D.P.R.R. 311.12 (See Docket Nos. 94, 95). . . . Local Rule 311.12 provides that the “moving party’s statement will be deemed to be admitted unless controverted . . . D.P.P.R 311.12. . . . Clearly, “parties who ignore Rule 311.12 do so at their own peril,” Hogar Club Paraiso, 208 F.R.D. at . . .

PUERTO RICO PHARMACEUTICAL, INC. v. PFIZER CORP. I II, 296 F. Supp. 2d 69 (D.P.R. 2003)

. . . Facts, docket entry 39) and, consequently, are deemed admitted pursuant to Local Rule of Procedure 311.12 . . .

QUI ONES- SEPULVEDA, s v. UNITED STATES s, 279 F. Supp. 2d 105 (D.P.R. 2003)

. . . Local Rule 311.12 requires the moving party to file and annex to the motion a “separate, short, and concise . . . The First Circuit has consistently upheld the validity of local rule 311.12. See, e.g., Morales v. . . . Moreover, Quiñones fails to comply with local Rule 311.12. . . . failure to present adequate legal argumentation, as well as her lack of compliance with local Rule 311.12 . . .

GONZALEZ PINA, v. RODRIGUEZ, 278 F. Supp. 2d 195 (D.P.R. 2003)

. . . Local Rule 311.12 In compliance with Local Rule 311.12, defendants have submitted “a separate, short . . . D.P.R.R. 311.12. . . . Local Rule 311.12 provides that the “moving party’s statement will be deemed to be admitted unless controverted . . . D.P.P.R 311.12. . . . Clearly, “parties who ignore Rule 311.12 do so at their own peril,” Hogar Club Paraiso, 208 F.R.D. at . . .

FIGUEROA MONTES, v. E. FOY, 272 F. Supp. 2d 168 (D.P.R. 2003)

. . . Local Rule 311.12 In order to aid the court in the daunting task of searching for genuine issues of material . . . fact in the record, this district has adopted Local Rule 311.12. . . . D.P.R.R. 311.12. . . . Plaintiff has not properly controverted defendants’ statement of facts as required by Local Rule 311.12 . . . Clearly, “parties who ignore Rule 311.12 do so at their own peril,” Hogar Club Paraiso, 208 F.R.D. at . . .

GARCIA SANCHEZ, v. R. ROMAN ABREU,, 270 F. Supp. 2d 255 (D.P.R. 2003)

. . . fact in the record, this district has adopted Local Rule 311.12. . . . D.P.R.R. 311.12. . . . Compliance with Rule 311.12 is critical, given that the Court will only consider the facts alleged in . . . the parties’ 311.12 statements when entertaining the movant’s arguments. . . . Without a proper 311.12 statement, plaintiffs simply cannot meet this burden. . . .

KING, v. TL DALLAS CO. LTD,, 270 F. Supp. 2d 262 (D.P.R. 2003)

. . . defendants' summary judgment petition be rejected arguing violation of the provisions of Local Rule 311.12 . . . Opposition to Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment upon the Parties' Failure to Comply with Local Rule 311.12 . . .

ALICEA v. P. R. TOURISM COMPANY, 270 F. Supp. 2d 243 (D.P.R. 2003)

. . . summary judgment (Docket Nos. 81 & 84) with a statement of uncontested facts pursuant to Local Rule 311.12 . . . FACTUAL BACKGROUND In compliance with Local Rule 311.12, defendants have submitted “a separate, short . . . D.P.R.R. 311.12. Plaintiffs, however, have blatantly ignored the mandates of Local Rule 311.12. . . . D.P.P.R 311.12. . . . Clearly, “parties who ignore Rule 311.12 do so at their own peril,” Hogar Club Paraiso, 208 F.R.D. at . . .

I. TORRES- ROSADO, v. E. ROTGER- SABAT A. An R. n V D. s,, 335 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2003)

. . . R. 311.5, 311.12. . . . Parties ignore rules such as Local Rule 311.12 at their peril. Ruiz Rivera, 209 F.3d at 27-28. . . .

E. VARGAS- RUIZ, v. GOLDEN ARCH DEVELOPMENT, INC., 283 F. Supp. 2d 450 (D.P.R. 2003)

. . . Even though both parties failed to comply with Local Rule 311.12 by not supplying their respective statements . . .

EUROMODAS, INC. v. ZANELLA, LTD., 253 F. Supp. 2d 201 (D.P.R. 2003)

. . . fact in the record, this district adopted Local Rule 311.12. . . . D.P.R.R. 311.12. . . . However, Euromodas responded with a deficient 311.12 statement (Docket No. 86). . . . “Parties, [like Euromodas, who] ignore [Rule 311.12, do so] at their own peril”. Velez v. . . . Said motion, not surprisingly, contains yet another deficient 311.12 statement. . . .

ACEVEDO MARTINEZ, v. COATINGS INC. AND CO., 251 F. Supp. 2d 1058 (D.P.R. 2003)

. . . Docket No. 50) and Vazquez (Docket No. 52) with a statement of uncontested facts pursuant to Local Rule 311.12 . . .

DOMINGUEZ- PEREZ v. HOSPITAL AUXILIO MUTUO Dr. Dr. ABC, 275 F. Supp. 2d 135 (D.P.R. 2003)

. . . exhibits extraneous to the allegations of the complaint and failed to comply with Local Rule of Procedure 311.12 . . . dismissal motion to one for summary judgment and granted defendants a final term to comply with Rule 311.12 . . .

TORRES, v. COOPERATIVA DE SEGUROS DE VIDA DE PUERTO RICO COSVI, 260 F. Supp. 2d 365 (D.P.R. 2003)

. . . LOCAL RULE 311.12 In compliance with Local Rule 311.12, COSVI has submitted “a separate, short concise . . . D.P.R.R. 311.12. Torres, however, has blatantly ignored the mandates of Local Rule 311.12. . . . Local Rule 311.12 further provides that the “moving party’s statement will be deemed to be admitted unless . . . controverted by the statement required to be served by the Opposing Party.” ■ D.P.P.R 311.12. . . . Clearly, “parties who ignore Rule 311.12 do so at their own peril,” Hogar Club Paraiso, 208 F.R.D. at . . .

W. CURBELO- ROSARIO, v. INSTITUTO DE BANCA Y COMERCIO, INC., 248 F. Supp. 2d 26 (D.P.R. 2003)

. . . See Local Rule 311.12. From these documents, the material facts are as follow: 1. . . .

GONZALEZ- RIVERA, v. CITIBANK, N. A., 260 F. Supp. 2d 350 (D.P.R. 2003)

. . . Gonzalez opposed the motion for summary judgment (Docket No. 36) but complied with Local Rule 311.12 . . . Upon review of the record, and after application of this District’s Local Rule 311.12, the Court grants . . . Compliance with Local Rule 311.12. . . . Local Rule 311.12 requires that “[t]he papers opposing a motion for summary judgment shall include a . . . Furthermore, plaintiff cannot excuse his failure to comply with Local Rule 311.12 simply by stating he . . .

SANCHEZ, v. ACAA,, 247 F. Supp. 2d 61 (D.P.R. 2003)

. . . In addition, this District's Local Rule 311.12 requires the moving party to file and annex to the motion . . . D.P.L.R. 311.12. . . . .

UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC. Co. v. FLORES- GALARZA,, 318 F.3d 323 (1st Cir. 2003)

. . . April 8, 2002, but failed to submit any statement of contested material facts as required by Local Rule 311.12 . . . the uncontested facts submitted by UPS because of the Secretary’s failure to comply with Local Rule 311.12 . . . court found UPS's statement of facts to be uncontested and therefore admitted pursuant to Local Rule 311.12 . . . Riley, 209 F.3d 24, 28 (1st Cir.2000)("[P]arties ignore [Local Rule 311.12] at their peril”); Ayala-Gerena . . .

J. L PEZ HERN NDEZ, v. FAJARDO V LEZ, 55 F. App'x 576 (1st Cir. 2003)

. . . to supply a statement of contested material facts with record citations, as is required by D.P.R.R. 311.12 . . . But without specific reference to the record as required by Local Rule 311.12, they are mere allegations . . . convoluted brief to present two arguments: that the court erred in concluding that he breached Local Rule 311.12 . . .

TIRADO, v. JOHNSON JOHNSON D. O. C. INC., 240 F. Supp. 2d 144 (D.P.R. 2003)

. . . Upon review of the record, and after application of this District’s Local Rule 311.12, the Court grants . . . Local Rule 311.12 Local Rule 311.12 requires the moving party to file and annex to the motion a “separate . . . The First Circuit has consistently upheld the validity of Local Rule 311.12. See, e.g., Morales v. . . . plaintiff when those facts were not proffered under a counterdesignation of facts as required by Local Rule 311.12 . . .

ARCE, v. ARAMARK CORPORATION,, 239 F. Supp. 2d 153 (D.P.R. 2003)

. . . Local Rule 311.12 of this District provides that “the papers opposing a motion for summary judgment shall . . . Despite Local Rule 311.12’s unequivocal requirement, the plaintiffs have failed to submit an adequate . . . facts and documents they allege are material it does not, nevertheless, meet the requirements of Local 311.12 . . . Accordingly, pursuant to Local Rule 311.12 we accept as uncontroverted the facts listed in the defendants . . .

ACEVEDO, v. JOHNSON JOHNSON- JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICAL,, 240 F. Supp. 2d 127 (D.P.R. 2002)

. . . The Court will only consider facts which are supported by the record in accordance with Local Rule 311.12 . . . Ortiz’s alleged discriminatory practices, however, there is no evidence of that complaint in Acevedo's 311.12 . . .

G. PLUMEY- CRUZ, v. WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRONIC CORPORATION,, 51 F. App'x 892 (1st Cir. 2002)

. . . ”) 56, accompanying its motion with an appropriate submission under the district court’s Local Rule 311.12 . . . Plumey answered the motion, including what he labeled as a responsive submission under Rule 311.12. . . . to file a surreply to Westinghouse’s November 27, 2001 reply; and 3. the asserted invalidity of Rule 311.12 . . . Finally, Rule 311.12 has repeatedly been upheld as valid by this Court (see, e.g., Morales v. A. C. . . .

VAZQUEZ- GARCIA, v. TRANS UNION DE PUERTO RICO,, 222 F. Supp. 2d 150 (D.P.R. 2002)

. . . While Sears partly complied with Local Rule 311.12, providing a “short, and concise statement of the . . . See Local Rule 311.12 (emphasis added). . . . Accordingly, since Sears makes reference to a transcript which is not part of the record, its Rule 311.12 . . . The First Circuit Court has constantly reiterated, particularly, with reference to Rule 311.12, that . . . Accordingly, since Sears’ motion does not comply with either Rule 311.12 nor Rule 311.4, the Court denies . . .

CORREA- PAGAN, v. GULF CHEMICAL CORPORATION,, 224 F. Supp. 2d 393 (D.P.R. 2002)

. . . Magistrate Judge noticed that GCC filed a Statement of Uncontested Material Facts, as required by Local Rule 311.12 . . . Upon review of the record, and following the application of Local Rule 311.12, the Magistrate Judge recommended . . . The First Circuit has consistently upheld the validity of Local Rule 311.12. See, e.g., Morales v. . . . when those facts were not proffered under a counter-designation of facts as required by Local Rule 311.12 . . . In light of the uncontested facts that the Court has adopted pursuant to Local Rule 311.12, it is clearly . . .

O. COLON COLON, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF NAVY,, 223 F. Supp. 2d 368 (D.P.R. 2002)

. . . Upon review of the record, and upon application of this District’s Local Rule 311.12, the Court grants . . . Local Rule 311.12 In addition, this District’s Local Rule 311.12 requires the moving party to file and . . . D.P.L.R. 311.12. . . . The First Circuit has consistently upheld the validity of Local Rule 311.12. See, e.g., Morales v. . . . Along with its motion for summary judgment, ITT submitted to the Court, in accordance with Local Rule 311.12 . . .

PUERTO RICO CAMPERS ASSOCIATION v. PUERTO RICO AQUEDUCT AND SEWER AUTHORITY, 219 F. Supp. 2d 201 (D.P.R. 2002)

. . . On May 8, 2002, PRASA filed a motion for summary judgment which included a memorandum of law and a 311.12 . . . On May 21, 2002, PRASA filed an amended 311.12. statement. (See Docket No. 81). . . . On June 14, 2002, the PRCA filed an opposition to the motion for summary judgment along with a 311.12 . . . {See Docket No. 83, Plaintiffs 311.12 Statement, pg. 2, 1HfA(7) and B(3)). . . .

LUGO RODRIGUEZ, v. PUERTO RICO INSTITUTE OF CULTURE,, 221 F. Supp. 2d 229 (D.P.R. 2002)

. . . D.P.R.R. 311.12. . . . D.P.R.R. 311.12. . . . It is clearly established in this District that compliance with Local Rule 311.12 is critical, given . . . Defendants, PRIC and Federal Insurance, filed the requisite 311.12 statement with appropriate references . . . Defendants seek to support all the facts contained in their 311.12 statement with the findings of fact . . .

R G ENGINEERING, INC. v. TRANSCONTAINER TRANSPORT, INC., 213 F. Supp. 2d 72 (D.P.R. 2002)

. . . submitted along with its motion for summary judgment and in accordance with the provisions of Local Rule 311.12 . . . twenty-one “facts”, thirteen (13) have no reference whatsoever to the record as mandated by Local Rule 311.12 . . . Strict compliance with the terms of Local Rule 311.12 has been endorsed by the Court of Appeals which . . . circumstances, it is clear that plaintiffs have failed to abide by the specific directive of Local Rule 311.12 . . .

BELTRAN SANCHEZ, v. WESLEYAN CHURCH CORP., 218 F. Supp. 2d 136 (D.P.R. 2002)

. . . task of searching for genuine issues of material fact in the record, this district adopted Local Rule 311.12 . . . D.P.R.R. 311.12. . . . Compli-anee with Local Rule 311.12 is critical, given that the Court will only consider the facts alleged . . . in the 311.12 statements when entertaining the movant’s arguments. . . . Wesleyan Church submitted a proper 311.12 statement along with its motion for summary judgment. . . .

RIVERA, v. AMERICAN HOME PRODUCTS,, 218 F. Supp. 2d 121 (D.P.R. 2002)

. . . The Cyanamid Plan also filed a Statement of Uncontested Material Facts, as required by Local Rule 311.12 . . . Upon review of the record, and following application of Local Rule 311.12, the Court grants the motion . . . The First Circuit has consistently upheld the validity of Local Rule 311.12. See, e.g., Morales v. . . . In light of the uncontested facts that the Court has adopted pursuant to Local Rule 311.12, there is . . . Given the application of Local Rule 311.12, all material facts contained in defendants's Statement of . . .

DISTRIBUIDORA VICENS VIVES, S. A. v. BORIKEN LIBROS, INC., 218 F. Supp. 2d 106 (D.P.R. 2002)

. . . Distribuidora, however, has failed to comply with the requirements of Local Rule 311.12. . . . It is clearly established in this District that compliance with Local Rule 311.12 is critical, given . . . that the Court will only consider the facts alleged in the aforementioned 311.12 statements when entertaining . . . “In simple terms, ‘parties [who] ignore [Rule 311.12, do so] at their own peril’ ”. Vélez v. . . . The Motion for Summary Judgment submitted by Distribuidora (Docket No. 10) contains a defective 311.12 . . .

NIEVES AYALA, v. JOHNSON JOHNSON, INC., 208 F. Supp. 2d 195 (D.P.R. 2002)

. . . Magistrate-Judge Gelpi found: (1) that Nieves Ayala failed to comply with Local Rule 311.12 when opposing . . . Local Rule 311.12. (Emphasis supplied.) . . . The First Circuit has consistently upheld the validity of Local Rule 311.12. See, e.g., Morales v. . . . His 311.12 statement is bereft of any specific references — indeed, it lacks any references- — -to the . . . Nieves Ayala's 311.12 statement with respect to defendant Allsup, Inc.' . . .

HERNANDEZ MARRERO, v. CROWLEY AMERICAN TRANSPORT, INC., 206 F. Supp. 2d 279 (D.P.R. 2002)

. . . statement of material facts as to which there is a genuine issue to be tried, as required by Local Rule 311.12 . . . Local Rule 311.12. . . . Local Rule 311.12 provides that: [u]pon any motion for summary judgment, there shall be served and filed . . .

COSME- ROSADO, v. SERRANO- RODRIGUEZ,, 218 F. Supp. 2d 95 (D.P.R. 2002)

. . . task of searching for genuine issues of material fact in the record, this district adopted Local Rule 311.12 . . . D.P.R.R. 311.12. . . . It is clearly established in this District that compliance with Local Rule 311.12 is critical, given . . . In the instant ease, plaintiffs have failed to comply with the requirements of Local Rule 311.12. . . . “In simple terms, ‘parties [who] ignore [Rule 311.12, do so] at their own peril’ ”. Vélez v. . . .

LAYME, s v. MATIAS, s, 218 F. Supp. 2d 98 (D.P.R. 2002)

. . . D.P.R.R. 311.12. . . . It is clearly established in this District that compliance with Local Rule 311.12 is critical, given . . . In the instant case, plaintiff has failed to comply with the requirements of Local Rule 311.12. . . . “In simple terms, ‘parties [who] ignore [Rule 311.12, do so] at their own peril’ ”. Vélez v. . . . defendants’ motion for summary judgment submitted by plaintiff (Docket No. 30) contains a defective 311.12 . . .

HOGAR CLUB PARAISO, INC. v. VARELA LLAVONA,, 208 F.R.D. 481 (D.P.R. 2002)

. . . D.P.R.R. 311.12. . . . It is clearly established in this District that compliance with Local Rule 311.12 is critical, given . . . In the instant case, all co-defendants have failed to comply with the requirements of Local Rule 311.12 . . . “In simple terms, ‘parties [who] ignore [Rule 311.12, do so] at their own peril’”. Velez v. . . . Plaintiffs are thus forewarned, that they must also comply with the requirements of Local Rule 311.12 . . .

SOUCHET, v. HOSPITAL SAN CRISTOBAL, s, 208 F. Supp. 2d 149 (D.P.R. 2002)

. . . D.P.R.R. 311.12. . . . It is clearly established in this District that compliance with Local Rule 311.12 is critical, given . . . In the instant case, Souchet has failed to comply with the requirements of Local Rule 311.12. . . . “In simple terms, ‘parties [who] ignore [Rule 311.12, do so] at their own peril’”. Vélez v. . . . The Motions for Summary Judgment submitted by Souchet (Docket No. 21, 32) contains a defective 311.12 . . .

UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC. Co. v. A. FLORES- GALARZA,, 210 F. Supp. 2d 33 (D.P.R. 2002)

. . . Defendant did not file a statement of contested facts as required by Local Rule 311.12, and failed to . . . Accordingly, the facts set forth in plaintiffs’ statement are hereby deemed admitted pursuant to Local Rule 311.12 . . .

ZUKOWSKI, v. ST. LUKE HOME CARE PROGRAM,, 206 F. Supp. 2d 236 (D.P.R. 2002)

. . . D.P.R.R. 311.12. . . . D.P.R.R. 311.12. . . . It is clearly established in this District that compliance with Local Rule 311.12 is critical, given . . . Lukes filed the requisite 311.12 statement with appropriate references to the record. . . . In lieu of the required statement, Zukowski has filed a “reply” to the defendant’s 311.12 statement, . . .

LEBRON- RIOS, s v. U. S. MARSHAL SERVICE, s, 200 F. Supp. 2d 50 (D.P.R. 2002)

. . . In order for this motion to become a summary judgment one, defendants had to comply with Local Rule 311.12 . . .

CASTRO- RIVERA, v. CITIBANK, N. A., 195 F. Supp. 2d 363 (D.P.R. 2002)

. . . See Local Rule 311.12; Morales v. Orssleffs EFTF, 246 F.3d 32, 33 (1st Cir.2001). . . . .

MELENDEZ, v. Dr. BRAU- RAMIREZ,, 194 F. Supp. 2d 76 (D.P.R. 2002)

. . . defendants did not submit a "Statement of Uncontested Material Facts,” which this Court's Local Rule 311.12 . . . No statement under Local Rule 311.12 is required in those circumstances. . . . .

COSME ROSADO, v. SERRANO RODRIGUEZ,, 196 F. Supp. 2d 117 (D.P.R. 2002)

. . . After applying Local Rule 311.12, the Court grants Defendants’ motion. . . . Local Rule 311.12 requires the moving party to file and annex to the motion a “separate, short, and concise . . . The First Circuit has consistently upheld the validity of Local Rule 311.12. See, e.g., Morales v. . . . when those facts were not proffered under a counterdesig-nation of facts as required by Local Rule 311.12 . . . See Local Rule 311.12; Morales v. Orssleff's EFTF, 246 F.3d 32, 33 (1st Cir.2001). . . . .

COLOM GONZALEZ, v. BLACK DECKER, PR, LLC., 193 F. Supp. 2d 419 (D.P.R. 2002)

. . . Local Rule 311.12 requires the moving party to file and annex to the motion a “separate, short, and concise . . . The First Circuit has consistently upheld the validity of Local Rule 311.12. See, e.g., Morales v. . . . Colom when those facts were not proffered under a counterdesignation of facts as required by Local Rule 311.12 . . .

GARCIA, v. FRITO- LAY SNACKS CARIBBEAN, INC., 181 F. Supp. 2d 38 (D.P.R. 2001)

. . . this motion as one for summary judgment, since the Defendant has expressly complied with Local Rule 311.12 . . . notes that those statements were not accompanied by a reference to the record as required by Local Rule 311.12 . . .

LAYME v. MATIAS,, 177 F. Supp. 2d 111 (D.P.R. 2001)

. . . Anti-Ferret Rule 311.12 Local Rule 311.12 requires the moving party to file and annex to the motion a . . . The First Circuit has consistently upheld the validity of Local Rule 311.12. See, e.g., Morales v. . . . plaintiffs when those facts were not proffered under a counterdesignation of facts as required by Local Rule 311.12 . . .

RAC ENTERPRISES, INC. A. v. SOUTHCORP USA, INC. USA, K, 22 F. App'x 20 (1st Cir. 2001)

. . . R. 311.12. RAC did indeed utterly fail to provide specific record citations. . . . We have previously upheld the application of Local Rule 311.12 to appropriate cases. . . .

RODRIGUEZ- CENTENO, v. PUEBLO INTERNATIONAL, INC., 171 F. Supp. 2d 43 (D.P.R. 2001)

. . . Local Rule 311.12, requires a party opposing summary judgment to submit "a separate, short, and concise . . . R. 311.12 (Butterworth, 1994). . . .

PE A, v. CROWLEY AMERICAN TRANSPORT, INC. CROWLEY MARITIME CORP., 172 F. Supp. 2d 321 (D.P.R. 2001)

. . . In the case at hand, defendants complied with the directive under Local Rule 311.12. . . . However, plaintiffs attempt to comply with this Rule 311.12 was totally deficient. . . .

VELEZ, v. PUERTO RICO ELECTRIC POWER AUTHORITY,, 170 F. Supp. 2d 158 (D.P.R. 2001)

. . . The R & R noted that Plaintiff had failed to comply with the requirements of Local Rule 311.12, in that . . . R explained that “[i]n view that Plaintiff did not fully comply with the requirements of Local Rule 311.12 . . . Local Rule 311.12 states in its pertinent part: Upon any motion for summary judgment, there shall be . . . “Local Rule 311.12 prevents ‘the recurrent problem of ferreting through the record’ and ‘the specter . . . Magistrate Gelpi noted in a footnote, and we agree, that “Defendant’s 311.12 statement is also bereft . . .

UNITED STATES, v. ONE PARCEL OF LAND, PARCELA P. R. L. CRIM, 16 F. App'x 16 (1st Cir. 2001)

. . . Riley, 209 F.3d 24, 27-28 & n. 2 (1st Cir.2000); Local Rule 311.12. . . .

SAN JUAN STAR COMPANY, v. CASIANO COMMUNICATIONS, INC., 176 F. Supp. 2d 110 (D.P.R. 2001)

. . . After application of our Local Rule 311.12, and upon review of the motion, the Court grants summary judgment . . . Casiano filed its motion, along with a Statement of Uncontested Material Facts, pursuant to Local Rule 311.12 . . . Local Rule 311.12 requires the moving party to file and annex to the motion a “separate, short, and concise . . . The First Circuit has consistently upheld the validity of Local Rule 311.12. See, e.g., Morales v. . . . when those facts were not proffered under a counter-designation of facts as required by Local Rule 311.12 . . .

STOUTT, v. BANCO POPULAR DE PUERTO RICO,, 158 F. Supp. 2d 167 (D.P.R. 2001)

. . . filed by defendant, BPPR, pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rule 311.12 . . .

LEBRON- TORRES, v. WHITEHALL LABORATORIES,, 251 F.3d 236 (1st Cir. 2001)

. . . R. 311.12. . . .

CORRADA BETANCES, v. SEA- LAND SERVICE, INC., 248 F.3d 40 (1st Cir. 2001)

. . . D.P.R.R. 311.12. . . . These authorities undermine Corrada’s attempted reliance on his response to Sea-Land’s meticulous Rule 311.12 . . .

MORALES v. A. C. ORSSLEFF S EFTF,, 246 F.3d 32 (1st Cir. 2001)

. . . The district of Puerto Rico has such a rule, Local Rule 311.12, which in relevant part requires a party . . . D.P.L.R. 311.12. . . .

CARMONA RIOS, v. ARAMARK CORPORATION,, 139 F. Supp. 2d 210 (D.P.R. 2001)

. . . R.Civ.P. 56 and Local Rule 311.12. (Docket No. 33). . . . Further, pursuant to Local Rule 311.12, the proponent of a summary judgment motion shall serve and file . . . Local Rule 311.12. Recently, in Ruiz Rivera v. . . . 24, 26 (1st Cir.2000), the First Circuit Court of Appeals held that “non compliance [with Local Rule 311.12 . . . Local Rule 311.12, in pertinent part states that "[tihe papers opposing a motion for summary judgment . . .