court must afford the parties notice and a reasonable opportunity to respond. Id. Lawyers, as officers of the court, have a duty of candor to the tribunal. Federated Mut. Ins. Co. v. McKinnon Motors, LLC, 329 F.3d 805, 808-09 (11th Cir.2003) (citing Burns v. Windsor Ins. Co., 31 F.3d 1092, 1095 (11th Cir.1994)). The Florida Rules of Regulating the Florida Bar also impose upon counsel a duty of candor to the court. See S.D. Fla. L.R. 11.1(B) (adopting the current Rules of Regulating the Florida Bar). In addition, Rule 11 “reinforces counsel’s duty of candor to the Court by subjecting litigants to potential sanctions for making a representations to the court for an improper purpose.” Footman v. Wang Tat Cheung, 341 F.Supp.2d 1218, 1225 (M.D.Fla.2004); see also Glatter, 65 F.3d at 1572 (<HOLDING>). The duty owed by attorneys is that of
holding that case law interpreting rule 11 may be use to interpret rule 9011 holding that a motion for rule 11 sanctions is dispositive holding sanction of 250000 under federal rule of bankruptcy procedure 9011 to be excessive and reducing to 5000 recognizing rule holding that regarding rule 9011 this court is only concerned with documents filed  in this court and thus filings in state court provide no basis to impose sanctions under rule 9011