Aldrich et al v. DIRECTV, Inc. et al
MINUTE ORDER granting 53 Motion for Protective Order RegardingRule 30(b)(6) Deposition, by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe on 2/03/2016.(slibi, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 14-cv-02854-MJW
MARVIN MARTINEZ, and
DIRECTV, INC. and
Entered by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe
It is hereby ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion for Protective Order Regarding
Rule 30(b)(6) Deposition (docket no. 53) and Supplement to Defendants’ Motion for
Protective Order Regarding Rule 30(b)(6) Deposition (docket no. 57) is GRANTED for
the following reasons. First, the parties have previously agreed in the Scheduling Order
that discovery from the Arnold and Lange cases may be used in this case. See docket
no 32 at 6. Second, the topics listed in the Rule 30(b)(6) notice by Plaintiffs seek
duplicative corporate depositions outside the relevant time frame on a large number of
the same topics, which is unduly burdensome, cumulative noting the discovery already
taken in the Arnold and Lange cases, and will cause unnecessary expense to
Defendants. In addition, I find that the relevant time frame is July 2010 to November
2014. Third, it does not appear that Plaintiffs have produced a large number of the
documents identified in the twenty-seven (27) categories of documents listed on
Plaintiffs’ Rule 26 disclosures even though Defendants have repeatedly requested such
documents. Parties facing cumulative or duplicative deposition notices under Rule
30(b)(6) have good cause to seek a protective order. See Nicholas v. Wyndham, Int’l,
Inc., 373 F.3d 537, 543 (4th Cir. 2004) (discovery sought was cumulative, duplicative,
unduly burdensome, and harassing). Accordingly, I find that Defendants have
established good cause for a protective order to enter pursuant to Rule 26(c).
It is FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ Rule 30(b)(6) notice is STRICKEN.
The parties shall forthwith meet and confer concerning a new Rule 30(b)(6) notice which
shall address specific topics at issue in this case that have not already been covered in
the depositions taken in the Arnold and Lange cases for the relevant time frame from
July 2010 to November 2014.
Date: February 3, 2016
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?