Opinion
Civil Action 1:21-cv-7395 (RA)
11-24-2021
FRHUEB INC. v. DE FREITAS ABDALA, et al.
HON. RONNIE ABRAMS, JUDGE
Dear Judge Abrams:
Our firm represents the Defendants in the above-captioned matter. The parties held a teleconference with the Court on November 19, 2021, to discuss scheduling regarding Defendants' Motion to Disqualify and Plaintiff's Request for Emergency Relief [Doc 37]. Two issues were discussed during this call but not resolved: (1) discovery on the motions; (2) and the Dec. 6, 2021, deadline for Defendants to amend their Answer to the Complaint.
As soon as the Court issued its Order [Doc. 37], our firm reached out to Plaintiff's counsel to meet and confer and resolve these two issues without involving the Court. However, Plaintiff's counsel has refused both of Defendants' requests. See Exhibits A and B (emails between counsel). We now request the court's guidance, through a conference call or by order, to address these two issues. Due to time constraints, we are making this request for a conference by email instead of filing a motion to extend time and motion to compel.
Regarding discovery, during the Nov. 19 teleconference, Judge Abrams asked the parties if they would need discovery on the motions and we responded affirmatively. Once the Order was issued, we asked Plaintiff's counsel if they would agree to an abbreviated discovery response time to accommodate the Dec. 3 briefing deadline set by the Court. See Exhibit A. Plaintiff's counsel responded that they “can't agree to a discovery response timeframe without knowing what the requests are first.” Id. Defendants diligently prepared and served their limited document requests on November 23, 2021. See Exhibit C. Plaintiff's counsel responded today that they object to the requests in their entirety and refuse to produce any documents in response. See Exhibit A.
Regarding the amended answer, Defendants request an extension of time, preferably, until after the TRO/PI hearing in January. Plaintiff's counsel has refused to stipulate to this or any extension. See Exhibit B. We believe this request is reasonable due to the overlap of this deadline with the briefing schedule set by the Court on the two more urgent matters of disqualification and the TRO/PI request.
Since the parties cannot agree on these two issues, Defendants respectfully request the guidance of the Court.
Respectfully Submitted, Jeannette M. Carmadella, Esq.
By separate order, this matter is being referred to Magistrate Judge Parker for all general pre-trial purposes, including but not limited to all discovery disputes and for the adjudication of the motion to disqualify that Defendants intend to file. The requests herein shall thus be addressed to Judge Parker.
SO ORDERED.