Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

ELI RESEARCH, LLC v. MUST HAVE INFO INC., 2:13-cv-695-FtM-38CM. (2015)

Court: District Court, M.D. Florida Number: infdco20150220f85 Visitors: 3
Filed: Feb. 20, 2015
Latest Update: Feb. 20, 2015
Summary: ORDER CAROL MIRANDO, Magistrate Judge. Before the Court are Defendants' Motions to Compel (Docs. 80-83) and Plaintiffs' responses (Docs. 96-99). The Court held a hearing on the motions on February 19, 2015. Counsel informed the Court that many of the issues had been resolved prior to the hearing, and the Court heard argument from counsel on the remaining issues. For the reasons stated on the record, it is hereby ORDERED: 1. Defendants Samantha Saldukas and Lacy Gaskins' Motion to Compel Com
More

ORDER

CAROL MIRANDO, Magistrate Judge.

Before the Court are Defendants' Motions to Compel (Docs. 80-83) and Plaintiffs' responses (Docs. 96-99). The Court held a hearing on the motions on February 19, 2015. Counsel informed the Court that many of the issues had been resolved prior to the hearing, and the Court heard argument from counsel on the remaining issues. For the reasons stated on the record, it is hereby

ORDERED:

1. Defendants Samantha Saldukas and Lacy Gaskins' Motion to Compel Complete and Non-Evasive Responses to First Set of Interrogatories (Doc. 80) is granted in part and denied in part as follows:

• Interrogatory nos. 3, 4, 6, 7, and 15 are DENIED AS MOOT. • Interrogatory nos. 5 and 8 are DENIED as written. Defendants will amend the request and are to identify categories of individuals. The Court limits the timeframe to the period of Defendants' employment (2002-2010). • Interrogatory no. 12 is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Plaintiff shall supplement the customer information already provided. • Interrogatory no. 13 is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Plaintiff's relevancy objection is overruled, but the time period will be limited to the period of Defendants' employment (2002-2010).

2. Defendants Samantha Saldukas and Lacy Gaskins' Motion to Compel Production of Documents Responsive to Defendants' Request for Production of Documents (Doc. 81) is granted in part and denied in part as follows:

• Request nos. 5-13 and 15-39 are DENIED AS MOOT. • Request no. 14 is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Plaintiff shall supplement the customer lists already provided.

3. Defendant Coding Leader's Motion to Compel Production of Documents Responsive to Defendant's First Request for Production of Documents and Interrogatories (Doc. 82) is granted in part and denied in part as follows:

• Request nos. 1-5, 8, 9, 10, 12-24, and interrogatory nos. 3, 5, 7, and 8 are DENIED AS MOOT. • Request no. 6 is DENIED as written. Defendant will amend the request to limit as to the time period. • Request no. 7 is DENIED. • Request no. 11 is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Plaintiff's relevancy objection is overruled, but the time period is limited to 2010-2014.

4. Defendant Coding Leader's Motion to Compel Production of Documents Responsive to Defendant's Second Request for Production (Doc. 83) is denied as follows:

• Request nos. 13-17, 19-20, 22-24, 26-29, and 31-35 are DENIED AS MOOT. • Request no. 21 is DENIED as written. Defendant will amend this request. • Request no. 30 is DENIED.

5. Defendants shall have up to and including February 23, 2015 to amend the interrogatories or requests as set forth above. For any requests or interrogatories not yet answered, or for which Plaintiffs are still searching for and producing documents, Plaintiffs should supplement their responses or produce the documents as they acquire them, but no later than March 6, 20151 or affirmatively state by this date that they have no additional documents for each particular request for which they have stated documents may still be produced.

DONE and ORDERED.

FootNotes


1. The Court stated at the hearing that Plaintiffs would be allowed one week to produce certain documents. The Court will provide Plaintiffs with additional time until March 6, 2015 for all documents that are still due to be produced.
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