Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Dynocom Industries, Inc. v. Mainline Automotive Equipment Pty. Ltd., 2:17-mc-0121 KJM DB. (2017)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20170925925 Visitors: 12
Filed: Sep. 22, 2017
Latest Update: Sep. 22, 2017
Summary: ORDER DEBORAH BARNES , Magistrate Judge . This action came before the court on September 22, 2017, for hearing of defendants' motion to compel. Attorney Andrew Graben appeared telephonically on behalf of the defendants. Attorney Timothy Nelson appeared in person, also on behalf of the defendants. No appearance was made by, or on behalf of, any plaintiff or third party Kert Miller. 1 Upon consideration of the arguments on file and those made at the hearing, and for the reasons set forth on
More

ORDER

This action came before the court on September 22, 2017, for hearing of defendants' motion to compel. Attorney Andrew Graben appeared telephonically on behalf of the defendants. Attorney Timothy Nelson appeared in person, also on behalf of the defendants. No appearance was made by, or on behalf of, any plaintiff or third party Kert Miller.1

Upon consideration of the arguments on file and those made at the hearing, and for the reasons set forth on the record at that hearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Defendants' August 25, 2017 motion to compel (ECF No. 1) is granted; and

2. Kert Miller shall produce the responsive discovery to the defendants within twenty-one days of the date of this order.

FootNotes


1. No opposition to defendants' motion has been filed.
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