Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

NATIONAL CREDIT UNION ADMINISTRATION BOARD v. MORGAN STANLEY & CO., 11cv2340 (JWL) (2015)

Court: District Court, D. Kansas Number: infdco20151005d13 Visitors: 12
Filed: Oct. 02, 2015
Latest Update: Oct. 02, 2015
Summary: ORDER DENISE COTE , District Judge . GEORGE H. WU , District Judge . JOHN W. LUNGSTRUM , District Judge . JAMES P. O'HARA , Magistrate Judge . DENISE COTE, HON. JOHN W. LUNGSTRUM, and HON. GEORGE H. WU, District Judges; and HON. JAMES P. O'HARA, Magistrate Judge: On September 28, 2015, UBS submitted an application to our three Courts requesting that NCUA be ordered to produce a deposition witness pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 30(b)(6), as well as certain documentat
More

ORDER

GEORGE H. WU, District Judge.

JOHN W. LUNGSTRUM, District Judge.

JAMES P. O'HARA, Magistrate Judge.

DENISE COTE, HON. JOHN W. LUNGSTRUM, and HON. GEORGE H. WU, District Judges; and HON. JAMES P. O'HARA, Magistrate Judge:

On September 28, 2015, UBS submitted an application to our three Courts requesting that NCUA be ordered to produce a deposition witness pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 30(b)(6), as well as certain documentation, to assist it in determining whether to seek spoliation sanctions for the purported failure of Western Corporate Federal Credit Union ("WesCorp") to preserve all counterparty reviews of originators and of servicers and credit reviews. The UBS request arises from deposition testimony given on June 9 and 10, 2015, by William Eberhardt ("Eberhardt"), WesCorp's former Director of Investment Credit Services. Certificates purchased by WesCorp are at issue in actions pending before our Courts in Kansas and California. NCUA has opposed this application in a submission of September 30.

Fact discovery closed in these coordinated actions on July 17, 2015, with certain exceptions not relevant here. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b)(4) provides that "[a] schedule may be modified only for good cause and with the judge's consent." Whether good cause exists depends upon the diligence of the moving party. See, e.g., Gorsuch, Ltd., B.C. v. Wells Fargo Nat. Bank Ass'n, 771 F.3d 1230, 1240 (10th Cir. 2014); In re W. States Wholesale Natural Gas Antitrust Litig., 715 F.3d 716, 737 (9th Cir. 2013); NCUA Order of July 10, 2015 (denying request to modify discovery schedule for failure to show good cause).

UBS has not shown good cause to reopen fact discovery. UBS has failed to show that it acted with sufficient diligence to raise this issue with our Courts, that it would be prejudiced by the denial of this application, or that WesCorp failed to comply with its discovery obligations. Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED that UBS's September 28, 2015 application to compel a Rule 30(b)(6) deposition and the production of certain documents is denied.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer