Hackworth v. Rangel et al

Filing 56

ORDER GRANTING Defendant's 55 Request to Take Deposition by Videoconference signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 6/22/2010. (Bradley, A)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ROBERT HACKWORTH, 10 Plaintiff, 11 v. 12 P. RANGEL, 13 Defendant. 14 / 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 The Court notes that Rule 30(b)(4) provides that the Court may "on motion" authorize a deposition to be conducted remotely. Defendants are advised that any future request to take a deposition via video conference should be filed as a motion in accordance with the rules.
1

U N IT E D STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CASE NO. 1:06-cv-850-AW I-MJS (PC)

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S REQUEST TO TAKE DEPOSITION BY VIDEOCONFERENCE (Doc. 55)

Defendant Rangel has filed a Request1 to Conduct Plaintiff Robert Hackworth's Deposition via Videoconference [Doc. 55]. Defendant asks for this relief in an attempt to minimize the expense associated with taking the deposition of a prisoner housed a significant distance from counsel for Defendant. Plaintiff has not opposed the Request. For good cause shown, Defendant's Request to Conduct Plaintiff Robert Hackworth's Deposition via Videoconference [Doc. 55] is GRANTED. Nothing in this Order shall be interpreted as requiring the institution in which Plaintiff is housed to obtain /// /// ///

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

videoconferencing equipment if it is not already available.

IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: ci4d6 June 22, 2010 /s/ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Michael J. Seng

2