Allred v. Home Depot USA, Inc.

Filing 51

ORDER - the Court hereby ORDERS: 1. Defendants Motion for Entry of Protective Order Precluding the 30(b)(6) Deposition of Home Depot (Dkt. 29 ) is DENIED AS MOOT; 2. Plaintiffs Motion to Compel the Continued Deposition of Josh Hazlett, to Extend the Deadline for Discovery, and for Sanctions (Dkt. 31 ) is DENIED AS MOOT; 3. Plaintiffs Amended Motion to Compel the Continued Deposition of Josh Hazlett, to Extend the Deadline for Discovery, and for Sanctions (Dkt. 32 ) is GRANTED IN PART with res pect to its request for sanctions. Defendants Counsel, Fortis Law Partners LLC, is to pay Plaintiffs Counsel, Pickens Cozakos, PA, Two Thousand and Seventy-Eight Dollars ($2078.00) pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 37(d)(3) and 37(b)( 2)(A)(i-vii); 4. The Parties Joint Motion for Modification of Case Management Order to Extend the Dispositive Motion Deadline (Dkt. 50 ) is hereby GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. The Court will vacate the dispositive motion deadline of 9/28/2018 . However, the Court will review and decide the merits of Plaintiffs Renewed Motion for Leave to Amend the Complaint (Dkt. 41 ) before setting a new dispositive motion deadline. Within one week of the Courts entry of its decision on Plaintiffs Renew ed Motion, the Parties are to propose a new dispositive motion deadline keeping in mind the Courts admonition that this case be speedily moved towards trial or settlement; 5. The Court may, depending on its decision regarding Plaintiffs Renewed Motio n for Leave to Amend the Complaint (Dkt. 41 ), further extend the discovery deadline. If the Court decides the Motion in Plaintiffs favor, the Parties are to propose a new discovery deadline within one week of the Courts entry of decision. Signed by Judge B. Lynn Winmill. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (cjs)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO
RANDI ALLRED,
Case No. 1:17-cv-00483-BLW
Plaintiff,
ORDER
v.
HOME DEPOT USA, INC, d.b.a. THE
HOME DEPOT,
Defendant.

INTRODUCTION
The Court currently has before it Defendant’s Motion for Entry of Protective
Order Precluding the 30(b)(6) Deposition of Home Depot (Dkt. 29); Plaintiff’s Motion to
Compel the Continued Deposition of Josh Hazlett, to Extend the Deadline for Discovery,
and for Sanctions (Dkt. 31); Plaintiff’s Amended Motion to Compel the Continued
Deposition of Josh Hazlett, to Extend the Deadline for Discovery, and for Sanctions (Dkt.
32); and the Parties’ Joint Motion for Modification of Case Management Order to Extend
the Dispositive Motion Deadline (Dkt. 50). The Court previously GRANTED IN PART
Plaintiff’s Amended Motion to Compel and ordered the continued deposition of Josh
Hazlett as well as an extension of the discovery deadline to November 29, 2018 (Dkt.
44).
ORDER

ORDER - 1

In accordance with the hearing held before the Court on September 27, 2018, the
Court hereby ORDERS:
1. Defendant’s Motion for Entry of Protective Order Precluding the 30(b)(6)
Deposition of Home Depot (Dkt. 29) is DENIED AS MOOT;
2. Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel the Continued Deposition of Josh Hazlett, to Extend
the Deadline for Discovery, and for Sanctions (Dkt. 31) is DENIED AS MOOT;
3. Plaintiff’s Amended Motion to Compel the Continued Deposition of Josh Hazlett,
to Extend the Deadline for Discovery, and for Sanctions (Dkt. 32) is GRANTED
IN PART with respect to its request for sanctions. Defendant’s Counsel, Fortis
Law Partners LLC, is to pay Plaintiff’s Counsel, Pickens Cozakos, PA, Two
Thousand and Seventy-Eight Dollars ($2078.00) pursuant to Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure 37(d)(3) and 37(b)(2)(A)(i-vii);
4. The Parties’ Joint Motion for Modification of Case Management Order to Extend
the Dispositive Motion Deadline (Dkt. 50) is hereby GRANTED IN PART and
DENIED IN PART. The Court will vacate the dispositive motion deadline of
September 28, 2018. However, the Court will review and decide the merits of
Plaintiff’s Renewed Motion for Leave to Amend the Complaint (Dkt. 41) before
setting a new dispositive motion deadline. Within one week of the Court’s entry
of its decision on Plaintiff’s Renewed Motion, the Parties are to propose a new
dispositive motion deadline keeping in mind the Court’s admonition that this case
be speedily moved towards trial or settlement;

ORDER - 2

5. The Court may, depending on its decision regarding Plaintiff’s Renewed Motion
for Leave to Amend the Complaint (Dkt. 41), further extend the discovery
deadline. If the Court decides the Motion in Plaintiff’s favor, the Parties are to
propose a new discovery deadline within one week of the Court’s entry of
decision.

DATED: October 1, 2018
_________________________
B. Lynn Winmill
Chief U.S. District Court Judge

ORDER - 3