Pyankovska v. Abid, 2:16-cv-02942-JCM-PAL. (2019)
Court: District Court, D. Nevada
Number: infdco20190109h64
Visitors: 9
Filed: Jan. 08, 2019
Latest Update: Jan. 08, 2019
Summary: ORDER (Mot Prot Ord — ECF No. 101) (Mot Compel — ECF No. 103) (Mot Amd DPSO — ECF No. 104) PEGGY A. LEEN , Magistrate Judge . Before the court is plaintiff Lyudmyla Pyankovska's Renew [sic] Emergency Motion for Protective Order (ECF No. 101) which was filed ex parte, Motion to Compel (ECF No. 103), and Motion to Amend Order Setting Final Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order (ECF No. 104). No oppositions have been filed to the motions, and the time for filing oppositions to the motions has
Summary: ORDER (Mot Prot Ord — ECF No. 101) (Mot Compel — ECF No. 103) (Mot Amd DPSO — ECF No. 104) PEGGY A. LEEN , Magistrate Judge . Before the court is plaintiff Lyudmyla Pyankovska's Renew [sic] Emergency Motion for Protective Order (ECF No. 101) which was filed ex parte, Motion to Compel (ECF No. 103), and Motion to Amend Order Setting Final Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order (ECF No. 104). No oppositions have been filed to the motions, and the time for filing oppositions to the motions has ..
More
ORDER
(Mot Prot Ord — ECF No. 101)
(Mot Compel — ECF No. 103)
(Mot Amd DPSO — ECF No. 104)
PEGGY A. LEEN, Magistrate Judge.
Before the court is plaintiff Lyudmyla Pyankovska's Renew [sic] Emergency Motion for Protective Order (ECF No. 101) which was filed ex parte, Motion to Compel (ECF No. 103), and Motion to Amend Order Setting Final Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order (ECF No. 104). No oppositions have been filed to the motions, and the time for filing oppositions to the motions has expired.
In a prior Order (ECF No. 98) denying plaintiff's sealed ex parte motion for protective order the court advised plaintiff that ex parte motions or requests are filed with the court but not served on opposing parties and are generally not permitted. The Order quoted the provisions of LR IA 7-2 which applies to ex parte communications. The Order also informed the parties 1) of the requirements for filing documents under seal; 2) the standard for obtaining a protective order under Rule 26(b); 3) the presumption of public access to judicial files and records; 4) the requirements of Fed. R. Civ P. 5.2 and LR IA 6-1 governing privacy protection for personal identification information; and 5) the special protection afforded to medical information under the Health Insurance Portability an Accountability Act of 1996 ("HIPAA"). Plaintiff's motion for protective order was denied because she had not met the standard for issuance of a protective order.
Despite being advised that ex parte motions are generally not permitted plaintiff has again filed a sealed ex parte renew (sic) motion for protective order, along with a motion to compel and motion to amend the discovery plan and scheduling order. None of these motions contain a certificate of service showing they were served on the defendant.
On December 20, 2018 attorney Alex Ghibaudo filed a notice of appearance on behalf of defendant Sean Abid (ECF No 108). Now that the defendant has retained counsel plaintiff must communicate with defense counsel and serve defense counsel with all future pleadings and papers filed in this case.
Having reviewed and considered the matter,
IT IS ORDERED that:
1. The Clerk of Court shall serve counsel for defendant with he Renewed Emergency Motion for Protective Order (ECF 101); the Motion to Compel (ECF No. 103); and the Motion to Amend Order Setting Final Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order (ECF No. 104);
2. Defendant shall have until January 22, 2019 to file a response to the motions;
3. Plaintiff shall have until January 29, 2019 to file replies;
4. A hearing on the motions is set for February 5, 2019 at 3:00 p.m.;
5. Plaintiff shall serve counsel for defendant with all further pleadings and papers in this case.
Source: Leagle
