ORDER

KENDALL J. NEWMAN, Magistrate Judge.

Presently pending before the court is defendant's motion to compel a vehicle inspection (ECF No. 21) and defendant's motion to strike plaintiff's expert disclosures and preclude the testimony of certain of plaintiff's expert witnesses. (ECF No. 25.)

The district judge's scheduling order requires fact discovery to be completed by June 25, 2018, and expert discovery to be completed by September 10, 2018. (ECF No. 16.) The term "completed" means that "all discovery shall have been conducted so that all depositions have been taken and any disputes relative to discovery shall have been resolved by appropriate order if necessary and, where discovery has been ordered, the order has been obeyed." (Id.)

Defendant's motion to compel a vehicle inspection is plainly untimely under the scheduling order, and the court thus denies it without prejudice on that basis. Additionally, although defendant's motion to strike expert disclosures is not untimely, it essentially seeks to preclude expert testimony at trial. Such a potential evidentiary sanction is best considered by the judge who will ultimately try the case. Consequently, the court also denies that motion without prejudice to its renewal before the district judge at an appropriate time. Moreover, the court notes that plaintiff has already filed a motion to modify the pretrial scheduling order before the district judge (ECF No. 26), which may potentially moot some or all of the discovery motions pending before the undersigned.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: