Lucido v. Nestle Purina Pet Care Company
ORDER by Judge Edward M. Chen denying 109 Defendant's Motion to Strike Supplemental Expert Report of Dr. Questen. (emclc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/16/2016)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
FRANK LUCIDO, et al.,
NESTLE PURINA PET CARE COMPANY,
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S
MOTION TO STRIKE THE
SUPPLEMENTAL EXPERT REPORT
OF DR. JENA QUESTEN
Docket No. 109
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
Case No. 15-cv-00569-EMC
Defendant Nestle Purina Pet Care Company (“Purina”) has filed a motion to strike the
supplemental expert report of Dr. Jena Questen. A hearing was held on the motion on September
15, 2016. As the Court indicated at the hearing, Purina’s motion to strike is DENIED. However,
the Court shall permit Purina to take a second deposition of Dr. Questen. The deposition shall be
telephonic, shall be limited in subject matter to the new matters raised in the supplemental report,
shall be no longer than (approximately) 90 minutes in length, and shall be taken no later than
September 22, 2016. Costs related to the deposition (other than attorney’s fees) shall be borne by
Plaintiffs. Purina shall have until (1) three (3) days after the deposition to file its reply brief in
support of its motion to exclude Dr. Questen (see Docket No. 110), or (2) by September 22, 2016,
whichever is later.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: September 16, 2016
EDWARD M. CHEN
United States District Judge
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?