Brown v. Rivard et al
Filing
43
ORDER GRANTING as Unopposed 42 Motion to Take Deposition--Signed by Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti. (MWil)
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?