Minhnga Nguyen v. The Boeing Company, C15-00793-RAJ. (2018)
Court: District Court, D. Washington
Number: infdco20180502l28
Visitors: 16
Filed: May 01, 2018
Latest Update: May 01, 2018
Summary: ORDER RICHARD A. JONES , District Judge . This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff's objections to Defendant's submitted deposition designations. Dkt. # 122. On April 27, 2017, the parties submitted Plaintiff's objections to deposition designations of Keith Sellers' deposition transcript ("Deposition") and Defendant's responses. Having reviewed the submissions of the parties, the relevant portions of the transcript, and the applicable law, the Court rules as follows: Plaintiff's obje
Summary: ORDER RICHARD A. JONES , District Judge . This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff's objections to Defendant's submitted deposition designations. Dkt. # 122. On April 27, 2017, the parties submitted Plaintiff's objections to deposition designations of Keith Sellers' deposition transcript ("Deposition") and Defendant's responses. Having reviewed the submissions of the parties, the relevant portions of the transcript, and the applicable law, the Court rules as follows: Plaintiff's objec..
More
ORDER
RICHARD A. JONES, District Judge.
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff's objections to Defendant's submitted deposition designations. Dkt. # 122. On April 27, 2017, the parties submitted Plaintiff's objections to deposition designations of Keith Sellers' deposition transcript ("Deposition") and Defendant's responses. Having reviewed the submissions of the parties, the relevant portions of the transcript, and the applicable law, the Court rules as follows: Plaintiff's objections to Deposition excerpts 16:2-16:15, 19:3-4, 32:21-33:11, and 34:5-20 are sustained, and Plaintiff's objections to Deposition excerpts 16:16-18:18, 18:24-19:2, and 19:5-12 are overruled. The Court further rules that Deposition excerpt 18:19-23 is only admitted for the limited purpose of providing context as to why the witness acted as he did and his thought process concerning the relevant disciplinary action.
Source: Leagle
