Pilling v. Target Corporation

Filing 35

ORDER DENYING AS MOOT DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL AND DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS by Judge Paul S. Grewal finding as moot 20 Motion to Compel (psglc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/14/2012) Modified on 11/14/2012 (ofr, COURT STAFF).

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

8

SAN JOSE DIVISION

11

JOHN PILLING,

12

Plaintiff,
v.

13
14

TARGET CORPORATION,

15

Defendant.

16

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: C 12-00862 PSG
ORDER DENYING AS MOOT
DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO
COMPEL AND DENYING
DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR
SANCTIONS
(Re: Docket No. 20)

17
Defendant Target Corporation (“Target”) moves to compel Plaintiff John Pilling (“Pilling”)
18
to produce an expert witness report. Target also moves for sanctions totaling $1,120.00. Plaintiff
19
John Pilling (“Pilling”) opposes the motion. On November 13, 2012, the parties appeared for
20
hearing. Having reviewed the papers and considered the arguments of counsel,
21
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Target’s motion to compel is DENIED as moot and
22
Target’s motion for sanctions is DENIED.
23
At the hearing, Pilling withdrew his designation of George Thabit, M.D. (“Thabit”) as a
24
retained rebuttal expert. He will testify in his capacity as a treating physician only. Based on
25

Pilling’s withdrawal of Thabit as a retained rebuttal expert, a written report is no longer required. 1

26
Target’s motion therefore is moot.
27
28

1

See Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B).
1

Case No.: C 12-00862 PSG
ORDER

1

In light of the above, Target’s motion for sanctions is denied.

2

IT IS SO ORDERED.

3

Dated: 11/13/2012

_________________________________
PAUL S. GREWAL
United States Magistrate Judge

4
5
6
7
8
9

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
Case No.: C 12-00862 PSG
ORDER