High Point Sarl v. Sprint Nextel Corporation et al

Filing 859

ORDER ADOPTING SPECIAL MASTER'S SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON PRIVILEGED DOCUMENTS AFTER REVIEW OF MISLABELED DOCUMENTS. No objections or motion to review the Special Master's Second Supplemental Report and Recommendatio ns was filed within the 21-day time period provided in Fed. R. Civ. P. 53(f)(2). Accordingly, the Court hereby adopts in full the Special Master's recommendations contained in his 850 Second Supplemental Report (ECF No. 850). Signed by Magistrate Judge David J. Waxse on 9/19/2012. (byk)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS HIGH POINT SARL, Plaintiff and Counterclaim Defendant, v. SPRINT NEXTEL CORPORATION, et al., Defendants and Counterclaimants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CIVIL ACTION Case No. 09-2269-CM-DJW ORDER ADOPTING SPECIAL MASTER’S SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON PRIVILEGED DOCUMENTS AFTER REVIEW OF MISLABELED DOCUMENTS On August 23, 2012, the Special Master filed his Second Supplemental Report and Recommendations on Privileged Documents After Review of Mislabeled Documents (ECF No. 850). In the report, the Special Master reviewed a group of documents submitted by Avaya that had been mislabeled for the Special Master’s prior in camera inspection. As a result of the Special Master’s review of the mislabeled documents, he sustained Avaya’s assertion of privilege with regard to all but one of the mislabeled documents. No objections or motion to review the Special Master’s Second Supplemental Report and Recommendations was filed within the 21-day time period provided in Fed. R. Civ. P. 53(f)(2). Accordingly, the Court hereby adopts in full the Special Master’s recommendations contained in his Second Supplemental Report (ECF No. 850). IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated in Kansas City, Kansas on this 19th day of September 2012. s/ David J. Waxse David J. Waxse U.S. Magistrate Judge cc: All counsel and pro se parties

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?