DECISION AND ORDER Procedural History On July 12, 2021, defendant was arraigned and charged with Assault in the Third Degree, Penal Law (PL) §120.00, a class A misdemeanor, and related charges. On October 12, 2021, at about 11:35 PM, the People filed a superseding information, a supporting deposition, a Certificate of Compliance (COC), a Statement of Readiness (SOR), a Notice/Disclosure form, and an inventory through the Electronic Document Delivery Service (EDDS). They also served it upon defense counsel via email and Microsoft OneDrive. On or about February 3, 2022, the defendant served and filed the instant motion to dismiss. On February 25, the People filed a Supplemental Certificate of Compliance (SCOC) together with additional discovery. The People oppose the motion in its entirety. A reply was served and filed and was considered by the court. A sur-reply was also served and filed. As the sur-reply addressed an issue raised for the first time in the defendant’s reply, the sur-reply was considered by the court. For the reasons stated below, the defendant’s motion to dismiss is GRANTED. Parties’ Contentions: The defendant argues that where the “the People served their COC and SOR [via EDDS and] on defense counsel at 11:35pm…they still failed to meet their filing obligations.” Defendant’s Memorandum of Law, Point II. Defendant maintains that since a court clerk could not stamp and actually file the papers until the next day, they were, in fact, not effectively filed on October 12. Further, defendant argues that the COC was illusory as the People have not provided many items of mandated discovery, and that they did not exercise due diligence and good faith or make reasonable inquiry into locating and sharing the missing discovery with defense before certifying that all discovery was complete. See list of items not turned over, Defendant’s Motion to Controvert,