In re Plastics Additives Antitrust Litigation

Full title: IN RE PLASTICS ADDITIVES ANTITRUST LITIGATION

Court: United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Date published: Dec 7, 2004

Civil Action No. 03-2038 (E.D. Pa. Dec. 7, 2004)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 03-2038.

December 7, 2004

ORDER

LEGROME DAVIS, District Judge

AND NOW, this 7^th day of December 2004, upon consideration of defendants' Motion for Protective Order to Withdraw Subpoenas Served on Trade Associations (Doc. No. 101), filed on November 9, 2004, and plaintiffs' response thereto (Doc. No. 105), filed on November 25, 2004, it is hereby ORDERED that Defendants' Motion is DENIED. As defendants admit, the sole purpose of the protective order is "to postpone [merits-based] discovery from the trade associations until after the Court has the opportunity to resolve defendants' motion for bifurcation." (See Def. Mem. In Support of Mot. For Protective Order, at 7). However, the Court has recently denied the defendant's motion for bifurcation, and, pursuant to the Court's November 30, 2004 Scheduling Order (Doc. No. 107), plaintiffs may proceed with merits-based discovery at this time. Accordingly, defendants have failed to meet the requirements for a protective order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26©).