Scientific Games Corporation et al v. AGS, LLC

Filing 61

ORDER. ( Motion Hearing re 44 , 45 , 46 set for 8/25/2017 at 02:00 PM in LV Courtroom 3D before Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe.) See Order for further deadlines. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe on 7/21/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 10 SCIENTIFIC GAMES CORPORATION, et al., 11 Petitioner(s), 12 vs. 13 AGS LLC, 14 Respondent(s). 15 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 2:17-cv-00343-JAD-NJK ORDER 16 Pending before the Court are several discovery motions. Docket No. 44 (motion to quash 17 subpoena); Docket No. 49 (response); Docket No. 52 (reply); Docket No. 45 (motion for protective 18 order); Docket No. 50 (response); Docket No. 53 (reply); Docket No. 46 (motion to compel); Docket 19 No. 47 (sealed, unredacted version of motion to compel); Docket No. 51 (response); Docket No. 54 20 (reply). The Court has already outlined the standards that will apply with respect to particular objections 21 that were made. Docket No. 57. A hearing is set on these motions for 2:00 p.m. on August 25, 2017, 22 in Courtroom 3D. 23 The parties have now agreed to move forward with the requests for documents as narrowed by 24 counsel’s proposal made during the meet-and-confer process. See Docket No. 60. Given that the 25 briefing does not conform to the discovery requests as narrowed, however, the Court hereby orders as 26 follows to ensure that the hearing is productive: 27 28 1 (1) The parties shall meet-and-confer regarding the narrowed requests for production by July 2 28, 2017. Respondent shall identify with specificity, by July 26, 2017, any objections 3 to those discovery requests as narrowed. 4 5 (2) The parties shall file, by August, 10, 2017, a joint statement regarding each discovery 6 request for which a dispute exists. That joint statement must separately address each 7 disputed request, providing the text of the request, the specific objections to it, 8 Respondent’s arguments supporting each objection, and then Petitioners’ arguments 9 opposing each objection. Cf. C.D. Cal. Local Rule 37-2.1 (outlining similar procedure 10 for presenting discovery disputes in the form of joint stipulations).1 Because this is a 11 joint submission, the page limitations established in the local rules shall not apply. To 12 the extent necessary, the joint statement shall attach any declarations or exhibits that the 13 parties wish to be considered.2 As the original movants, Docket No. 1, Petitioners shall 14 be responsible for compiling and filing the joint statement, and the parties shall confer 15 on the best mechanism for accomplishing that. Cf. C.D. Cal. Local Rule 37-2.2. 16 17 (3) As noted previously, the Court finds that the arguments regarding any dispute related to 18 deposition topics are not well-developed. See Docket No. 57 at 6-7. To the extent a 19 dispute exists regarding deposition topics, that dispute shall be included in the above 20 meet-and-confer and shall be addressed in the joint statement in the manner outlined 21 above (i.e., the joint statement shall include separately for each disputed deposition topic 22 23 1 24 25 26 27 28 To be clear, the parties must meaningfully address each objection with citation to legal authority. Merely identifying an objection will not suffice. Cf. Kor Media Group, LLC v. Green, 294 F.R.D. 579, 582 n.3 (D. Nev. 2013) (courts may deem waived arguments that are not meaningfully developed). The joint statement must be complete in itself. The parties may not incorporate by reference arguments made elsewhere. 2 The parties may not simply cite to the docket of either this case or the Illinois case, and instead must attach a copy of any exhibit that they believe should be considered. 2 1 the text of the topic, the specific objections to it, Respondent’s arguments supporting 2 each objection, and Petitioner’s arguments opposing each objection). 3 4 (4) Petitioners shall deliver two courtesy copies of the joint statement (and any declarations 5 and exhibits attached thereto) to the undersigned’s box in the Clerk’s Office by 3:00 on 6 August 11, 2017. 7 8 IT IS SO ORDERED. 9 DATED: July 21, 2017 10 11 ______________________________________ NANCY J. KOPPE United States Magistrate Judge 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

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?