affirming protective order excusing defendants from responding to plaintiff's discovery requests "which exceeded the scope of permissible discovery . . . were a month later than promised" where there was no injury or prejudice to the plaintiff's "discovery activities"

affirming protective order of the district court excusing the defendants from responding to untimely discovery requests

rejecting habeas petitioner's claim based on the trial court allowing a surprise un-deposed witness to testify where the petitioner made bare assertions with no factual support that his counsel was unable to effectively cross-examine a surprise witness allowed to testify at trial

remanding because ALJ failed to consider whether the claimant rebutted the DOT's definition of her prior relevant work