From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Uddin v. Mayorkas

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Dec 17, 2021
21 Civ. 10362 (AT) (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 17, 2021)

Opinion

21 Civ. 10362 (AT)

12-17-2021

Sharnsu Uddin, Nargish Akter, Md Faysal Mahmud Peyam, and Sadika Afhan, Plaintiffs, v. Alejandro Mayorkas, Secretary, D.H.S., and Ur Mendoza Jaddou, Director, USCIS Texas Service Center, Defendants.


ORDER

ANALISA TORRES, DISTRICT JUDGE

To protect the public health, while promoting the “just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding, ” Fed.R.Civ.P. 1, it is ORDERED pursuant to Rules 30(b)(3) and 30(b)(4) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure that all depositions in this action may be taken via telephone, videoconference, or other remote means. It is further ORDERED pursuant to Rule 30(b)(5) that a deposition will be deemed to have taken place “before an officer appointed or designated under Rule 28” if such officer attends the deposition using the same remote means used to connect all other participants, so long as all participants (including the officer) can clearly hear and be heard by all other participants. The parties are encouraged to engage in discovery through remote means at every available opportunity.

SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Uddin v. Mayorkas

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Dec 17, 2021
21 Civ. 10362 (AT) (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 17, 2021)
Case details for

Uddin v. Mayorkas

Case Details

Full title:Sharnsu Uddin, Nargish Akter, Md Faysal Mahmud Peyam, and Sadika Afhan…

Court:United States District Court, S.D. New York

Date published: Dec 17, 2021

Citations

21 Civ. 10362 (AT) (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 17, 2021)