Brown v. Rivard et al

Filing 43

ORDER GRANTING as Unopposed 42 Motion to Take Deposition--Signed by Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti. (MWil)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION TRENT BROWN #210522, Plaintiff v. Case No. 5:16-CV-12362 District Judge Judith Levy Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti STEVE RIVARD, MARK McCULLICK, KATHLEEN PARSONS, FORREST WILLIAMS and STEPHEN BARNES, Defendants. ___________________________________/ ORDER GRANTING AS UNOPPOSED DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TAKE PLAINTIFF’S DEPOSITION (DE 42) Pending is Defendants’ November 1, 2017 motion to depose pro se Plaintiff. (DE 42.) Permission of the Court to take the deposition is required under Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(a)(2)(B) because Plaintiff is incarcerated. Plaintiff has not responded to the motion and the time for doing so under LR 7.1 has expired. The motion therefore may be granted as unopposed. Thus, upon the reading and filing of Defendants’ Motion for Leave to Take Plaintiff’s Deposition Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(a)(2)(B), and otherwise, being fully advised in the premises; IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion for Leave to Take Plaintiff’s Deposition Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(a)(2)(B) (DE 42) is GRANTED AS UNOPPOSED, and Defendants shall be permitted to take the deposition of the Plaintiff for all purposes allowed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The deposition may occur either in person, by telephone, or via video teleconference, at Defendants’ option and consistent with the requirements and needs of Plaintiff’s place of incarceration. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: November 29, 2017 s/Anthony P. Patti Anthony P. Patti UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Certificate of Service I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was sent to parties of record on November 29, 2017, electronically and/or by U.S. Mail. s/Michael Williams Case Manager for the Honorable Anthony P. Patti 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?