STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTION TO PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER

TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge.

WHEREAS, the Court issued a Pretrial Scheduling Order ("Order") in this case on August 2, 2016, which covered multiple topics, including the scope of discovery in this case;

WHEREAS, the Court's Order was to become final unless objections were filed within fourteen days of service of the Order;

WHEREAS, on August 16, 2016, Plaintiff filed an objection regarding the Order ("Plaintiff's Objection"), in which he objected to the scope of discovery as set forth in Section IV of the Order, but did not object to any other part of the Order;

WHEREAS, on August 17, 2016, the parties received an email from the Court's Courtroom Deputy indicating that the Court would like to know if the parties are willing to stipulate to Plaintiff's Objection, and if so, requesting that the parties file a stipulation and proposed order to that effect;

WHEREAS, the parties have met and conferred and have reached agreement on this issue;

THEREFORE, the parties hereby stipulate to Plaintiff's Objection, without Defendants waiving their right to assert objections in response to discovery requests, to be addressed pursuant to normal discovery procedures. The parties further stipulate that all other portions of the Order not addressed in Plaintiff's Objection are in effect.

SIGNATURE ATTESTATION

I, Kirsten Scott, hereby attest that the concurrence in the filing of the document has been obtained from the other signatory on this document.

IT IS SO ORDERED.