From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bendickson v. Vroom Inc.

United States District Court, Western District of Washington
Jan 23, 2023
3:21-cv-05762-DGE (W.D. Wash. Jan. 23, 2023)

Opinion

3:21-cv-05762-DGE

01-23-2023

HEATHER DOREEN BENDICKSON, Plaintiff, v. VROOM, INC., and ALLY FINANCIAL, INC., Defendants.


MINUTE ORDER REGARDING DISCOVERY DISPUTE

DAVID G. ESTUDILLO, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

The following Minute Order is made by direction of the Court, United States District Judge David G. Estudillo:

Regarding the Disputed Discovery Issues filed by the parties on January 20, 2023 (Dkt. No. 51), the Court ORDERS as follows:

1. As to Item No. 1 Responses to Request for Production: Plaintiff SHALL inform Defendant of each document or category of documents they assert Defendants have not produced. Then, the parties SHALL meet and confer to discuss the allegedly deficient production of documents or categories of documents. If after the conference a dispute remains, the parties SHALL file a joint status report identifying each document or category of documents that remain in dispute, and for each document or category of documents succinctly identify their respective positions as to why each document or category of documents have (or have not) been produced. The parties SHALL identify a separate and distinct position as to each document or category of documents. In other words, the parties are not to lump all matters into one bullet point. Each document or category of documents shall have a separate bullet point followed by each parties' position on that particular bullet point.

2. As to Item No. 2 the 30(b)(6) Depositions: the parties SHALL meet and confer to discuss all issues regarding the 30(b)(6) topics. If after the conference a dispute remains regarding the proposed 30(b)(6) topics, the parties SHALL include in the joint status report each proposed topic remaining in dispute, and for each topic succinctly identify their position as to why or why not the proposed 30(b)(6) topic is or is not an appropriate topic. The parties SHALL identify a separate and distinct position as to each proposed 30(b)(6) topic. In other words, the parties are not to lump all topics into one bullet point. Each topic SHALL have a separate bullet point followed by each parties' position on that particular bullet point.

3. As to Item No. 4 the Privilege Log: the parties SHALL include with their joint status report a copy of the privilege log Defendant Vroom indicates it provided to Plaintiff on December 28, 2022.

4. The parties SHALL file the joint status report no later than 12:00 p.m., January 27, 2023 for the Court to review. The joint status report shall be succinctly drafted in a bullet point format as it is meant to inform the Court of the general nature of each disputed matter and each parties' position on each item. The joint status report is not meant to be a legal memorandum.

The foregoing Minute Order authorized by THE HONORABLE DAVID G. ESTUDILLO, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.


Summaries of

Bendickson v. Vroom Inc.

United States District Court, Western District of Washington
Jan 23, 2023
3:21-cv-05762-DGE (W.D. Wash. Jan. 23, 2023)
Case details for

Bendickson v. Vroom Inc.

Case Details

Full title:HEATHER DOREEN BENDICKSON, Plaintiff, v. VROOM, INC., and ALLY FINANCIAL…

Court:United States District Court, Western District of Washington

Date published: Jan 23, 2023

Citations

3:21-cv-05762-DGE (W.D. Wash. Jan. 23, 2023)