Matches in SCALES for { <http://schemas.scales-okn.org/rdf/scales#/DocketEntry/ilnd;;1:12-cv-06415_de58> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 7 of
7
with 100 items per page.
- ilnd;;1:12-cv-06415_de58 RegisterActionDate "2013-11-13" @default.
- ilnd;;1:12-cv-06415_de58 RegisterActionDescriptionText "MINUTE entry before Honorable Young B. Kim: Before the court are Defendants' motion for protective order [ 51 , 53 ] and Plaintiffs' agreed motion for an extension of time to complete discovery 54 . Motion 53 is an amended version of motion 51 . Motions 51 and 53 are granted in part and denied in part. The motions are granted as they pertain to the interrogatories and request to produce. In this case, the parties had until June 4, 2013, to complete written discovery. After the status hearing on September 17, 2013, the court issued an order stating that the parties had completed written discovery, that they did not have any outstanding written discovery issues and that they were moving forward with oral discovery. In light of this report, the court scheduled November 15, 2013, as the deadline for complete all discovery. The court takes great care to supervise discovery in phases in order to avoid having the parties conduct written discovery in fits and starts and to prevent parties from serving multiple sets of written discovery requests throughout the discovery period, often times served just before the discovery period expires. Here, Plaintiffs did not object or seek clarification of the court's orders and did not seek leave of court, based on good cause, to serve a supplemental set of written discovery requests. Therefore, Defendants are not obligated to respond to Plaintiffs' October 4, 2013 interrogatories and request to produce. If this ruling leaves Plaintiffs with no choice but to serve additional Rule 30(b)(6) deposition notices to get the information they need, the court is confident that the parties will work together to find the discovery solution that is most efficient. The motions are denied as to the request to admit. While Rule 36 is considered and identified as a discovery rule, the court makes an exception here as requests to admit are generally intended to narrow and better define the scope of the disputed factual issues, rather than to elicit or discover information in support of a claim or defense. As such, the court makes an exception here, despite Plaintiffs' failure to seek leave of court, and orders Defendants to respond to the request to admit by December 13, 2013. Motion 54 is granted. Parties now have until January 31, 2014, to complete all discovery. However, parties are ordered to schedule all outstanding depositions by November 29, 2013, and file the agreed upon deposition schedule with the court by December 2, 2013. Parties are not required to appear on these motions on November 14, 2013. The status hearing scheduled for November 26, 2013, is rescheduled for February 4, 2014, at 11:00 a.m. Mailed notice (ma,) (Entered: 11/13/2013)" @default.
- ilnd;;1:12-cv-06415_de58 AdministrativeID "57" @default.
- ilnd;;1:12-cv-06415_de58 OntologyLabel minute_entry @default.
- ilnd;;1:12-cv-06415_de58 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ilnd;;1:12-cv-06415_de52 @default.
- ilnd;;1:12-cv-06415_de58 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ilnd;;1:12-cv-06415_de54 @default.
- ilnd;;1:12-cv-06415_de58 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ilnd;;1:12-cv-06415_de55 @default.