Hoot Winc, LLC v. RSM McGladrey Financial et al

Filing 149

ORDER Regarding the Parties' Respective Motions to Compel Further Answers to Interrogatories. Signed by Magistrate Judge William McCurine, Jr on 7/12/10.(vet)

Hoot Winc, LLC v. RSM McGladrey Financial et al

Doc. 149

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 The Court held a discovery teleconference on July 8, 2010. Alexander Conti, Esq., appeared for Plaintiff. Anthony Durone, Esq., appeared for Defendant. The telephonic discovery hearing was placed on the record. Accordingly, Judge McCurine's oral rulings from the discovery hearing are hereby incorporated fully herein. In addition, the Court further orders the following: Plaintiff shall supplement its responses to Defendant's Interrogatories Nos. 10, 11, 12 and 13, no later than August 2, 2010. Defendant shall provide a revised Interrogatory Request No. 13 to Plaintiff no later than July 12, 2010. Defendant has failed to answer the following interrogatories with any factual detail. Rather, defendant has given broad conclusory allegations instead of facts in response to Plaintiff's interrogatories. The answers do not give any specific factual detail. Defendant must supplement its answers to those interrogatories: interrogatory interrogatories numbers 2,5,6, 7, 13, 14, 15, 18, v. RSM McGLADREY FINANCIAL PROCESS OUTSOURCING, LLC, and DOES 1 to 50, inclusive, Defendants. HOOT WINC, LLC, Plaintiff, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 08cv1559 BTM (WMc) ORDER REGARDING THE PARTIES' RESPECTIVE MOTIONS TO COMPEL FURTHER ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES

08cv1559 BTM (WMc)

Dockets.Justia.com

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

21, 22, 23, 24 and 25. Defendant must provide verified supplemental responses to the above identified interrogatories order no later than August 16, 2010. Defendant does not have to supplement it answers to interrogatories numbers 8, 9, 19. However, by its answer to these interrogatories Defendant is asserting under penalty of perjury that the only factual basis in support of the contentions identified in interrogatories numbers 8, 9 and 19 are fully set forth in its answers to these interrogatories. Each party shall bear its own attorney fees and costs in connection with their respective motions to compel further answers to interrogatories. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: July 12, 2010 Hon. William McCurine, Jr. U.S. Magistrate Judge, U.S. District Court

2

08cv1559 BTM (WMc)