Opinion
23-cv-1160 (JHR) (JW)
01-22-2024
TRUSTEES OF THE LOCAL 854 PENSION FUND, et al. Plaintiffs, v. BARRETT, et al. Defendants.
ORDER
JENNIFER E. WILLIS, United States Magistrate Judge:
On January 17th, the Court held a Local Rule 37.2 conference to discuss various discovery disputes. The Court ruled on several issues. With respect to two issues, 1) Defendants' discovery demands and 2) Plaintiffs' objections to Defendants' 30(b)(6) notices, the Plaintiffs notified the Court that their deadline to respond to Defendant's letter motion had not yet passed, and Plaintiffs sought additional time to respond. The Defendant then requested permission to file a supplemental response to Plaintiffs' anticipated letter. The Court granted both requests.
On January 21st, the Court received a letter from Counsel for Defendant Ken Barrett saying that “in an effort to streamline the case and avoid getting bogged down in endless discovery motions, [Defendant] reformatted the [30(b)(6)] notice....we trust this amended notice fully advises Plaintiffs of the deposition topics to be covered, and resolves any outstanding objections to the original notice.” Dkt. No. 76.
The Court has determined that the most appropriate path forward is to cancel the oral argument scheduled for January 23rd and to direct the Parties to meet and confer by January 29th on the reformatted notice and other outstanding issues.
The Parties shall jointly provide a status update by January 30th advising the Court as to whether any of the remaining matters have been resolved. If any of the issues have not been resolved by that date, by February 2nd , the Parties shall each submit a letter motion of no more than three pages, single-spaced, pointing to specific case law in support of their positions. The submissions shall both be filed on the 2nd, and no oppositions, replies, or sur-replies are permitted.
SO ORDERED.