Opinion
Case No. 02-CV-73747-DT.
February 15, 2005
On January 31, 2005, BMW filed an emergency motion for protective order to stay discovery requests until a discovery conference has been held. (Doc. Ent. 115). BMW requests entry of an order staying "all discovery requests from [p]laintiff until a discovery conference is held so that an orderly discovery process can be determined." Mtn. at 5. Plaintiff filed a response on February 2, 2005. (Doc. Ent. 120).
On February 15, 2005, Judge Edmunds referred this motion to me for hearing and determination. (Doc. Ent. 123).
On February 10, 2005, following the hearing regarding plaintiff's January 20, 2005, motion to compel production of documents by BMW NA and BMW AG and compel BMW AG to provide responses to plaintiff's second set of interrogatories (warranty information and failure statistics), I conducted a discovery conference with plaintiff's counsel (Mr. Lipton) and defense counsel (Mr. Branigan).
Therefore, BMW's emergency motion for protective order to stay discovery requests is DENIED AS MOOT, because a discovery conference has been held.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
The attention of the parties is drawn to Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(a), which provides a period of ten days from the date of this Order within which to file any written appeal to the District Judge as may be permissible under 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1).