Brooks et al v. C.H. Robinson International, Inc et al
MEMORANDUM TO COUNSEL. Signed on 9/26/17 by District Judge Howard F. Sachs. (Anderson, Christy)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
Don Brooks & Alexandria Johnson,
On Behalf of themselves and
all others similarly situated,
C.H. Robinson International. Inc., et al.,
Case No. 4:16-cv-00939-761-HFS
A discovery dispute has been brought to our attention by way of a joint email to chambers dated
September 22, 2017.
The dispute is whether plaintiffs are entitled to conduct a Rule 30(b)(6) deposition of corporate
representatives during the Phase One discovery period and whether the remaining briefing of the motion
to certify should be amended due to these depositions.
The parties agreed to allow plaintiffs to conduct the depositions of Phase One corporate
representatives by written questions pursuant to Rule 31(a)(4). Thus, the only dispute remaining is
whether the briefing schedule should be amended. Defendants argue that the briefing schedule should
be amended because plaintiffs would have the benefit of information from the depositions in their reply
brief that they may not have in their motion in opposition.
The parties should keep the briefing schedule in place. Should defendants find it necessary to
address information provided by plaintiffs in their reply brief, defendants would have the opportunity to file
a motion for leave to file a sur reply to address such information or argument.
/s/ Howard F. Sachs
Howard F. Sachs
United States District Court Judge
September 26, 2017
Kansas City, Missouri
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?