Filing 9

ORDER granting in part and denying in part 1 Motion to Quash. A proposed confidentiality order should submitted to the Court not later than 11/27/2012. Ordered by Judge Hugh Lawson on 11/20/2012. (nbp)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA VALDOSTA DIVISION SEVERN PEANUT CO., INC. and MEHERRIN AGRICULTURE & CHEMICAL CO., Plaintiffs, Case No. 7:12-MC-4 (HL) v. INDUSTRIAL FUMIGANT CO. and ROLLINS, INC., Defendants, TIFTON QUALITY PEANUTS, LLC, Movant. ORDER This case is before the Court on a Motion to Quash (Doc. 1) filed by Tifton Quality Peanuts, LLC. As discussed during the telephonic hearing held on November 19, 2012, the Motion to Quash is granted, in part, and denied, in part. TQP must respond to subpoena requests 2, 8, 9, 10, 11, 17, 18, 28, 29, 30, and 31. TQP does not have to respond to subpoena requests 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, or 27. Counsel for TQP is to draft a confidentiality order which will govern the production of the documents. The proposed order should then be submitted to counsel for Industrial Fumigant Co. and Rollins, Inc. for approval. The agreed- upon proposed order is to be submitted to the Court for review no later than November 27, 2012. The deadline for the responsive documents and electronically stored information to be produced is December 15, 2012. Industrial Fumigant and Rollins are responsible for paying all costs associated with responding to the subpoena, including the reasonable time and expense of any TQP employees who assist in the retrieval and production of the requested documents and electronically stored information, as well as the reasonable time and expense of any attorneys who assist TQP in responding to the subpoena. SO ORDERED, this the 20th day of November, 2012. s/ Hugh Lawson HUGH LAWSON, SENIOR JUDGE mbh 2

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?