Opinion
22 Civ. 4855 (AT)
06-30-2022
PERICLES LANTZ, Plaintiff, v. WILHELM LIEBENBERG, CAROLINE LIEBENBERG, JONATHAN E. MOSKIN, and John Does 1-6, 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.