PARKER v. COMCAST CABLE COMMUNICATIONS MANAGEMENT, LLC, 3:15-cv-05673-TEH (KAW). (2017)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20170419d04
Visitors: 9
Filed: Apr. 18, 2017
Latest Update: Apr. 18, 2017
Summary: ORDER TERMINATING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STRIKE DEPOSITION CHANGES BY DANIELLE ROSS PARKER AND ORDERING THE PARTIES TO SUBMIT A JOINT LETTER Re: Dkt. No. 51 KANDIS A. WESTMORE , Magistrate Judge . On April 17, 2017, Defendant Comcast Cable Communications Management, LLC filed a motion to strike deposition changes made by Plaintiff Danielle Ross Parker under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(e)(B)(1). (Def.'s Mot., Dkt. No. 51.) Specifically, Defendant contends that the changes did not bear
Summary: ORDER TERMINATING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STRIKE DEPOSITION CHANGES BY DANIELLE ROSS PARKER AND ORDERING THE PARTIES TO SUBMIT A JOINT LETTER Re: Dkt. No. 51 KANDIS A. WESTMORE , Magistrate Judge . On April 17, 2017, Defendant Comcast Cable Communications Management, LLC filed a motion to strike deposition changes made by Plaintiff Danielle Ross Parker under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(e)(B)(1). (Def.'s Mot., Dkt. No. 51.) Specifically, Defendant contends that the changes did not bear ..
More
ORDER TERMINATING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STRIKE DEPOSITION CHANGES BY DANIELLE ROSS PARKER AND ORDERING THE PARTIES TO SUBMIT A JOINT LETTER
Re: Dkt. No. 51
KANDIS A. WESTMORE, Magistrate Judge.
On April 17, 2017, Defendant Comcast Cable Communications Management, LLC filed a motion to strike deposition changes made by Plaintiff Danielle Ross Parker under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(e)(B)(1). (Def.'s Mot., Dkt. No. 51.) Specifically, Defendant contends that the changes did not bear Plaintiff's actual signature or a statement of reasons explaining the changes as required by Rule 30(e). Id. at 2. Instead, Defendant claims that this is an attempt to rewrite Plaintiff's deposition testimony rather than correct stenographic or typographical errors. Id. Upon cursory review, the Court tends to agree.
After the motion was filed, the presiding judge granted a limited extension to file discovery disputes pertaining to deposition transcripts, so the undersigned TERMINATES the motion and orders the parties to meet and confer, and, if necessary, file a joint letter by Friday, April 21, 2017.1 If the parties are unable to meet and confer and file a joint letter by the deadline, the Court will entertain a unilateral letter from Defendant to be filed by Monday, April 24, 2017.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
FootNotes
1. The deadline was extended until April 20, 2017, but the presiding judge has approved a slightly longer extension in this instance so that the motion may be resolved by joint letter rather than by formal motion.
Source: Leagle
