McKeon Rolling Steel Door Co., Inc. v. U.S. Smoke & Fire Corp. et al

Filing 73

ORDER granting 69 Letter Motion to Compel. For the reasons set forth at the conference, Plaintiff's motion to compel discovery is GRANTED and resolved as follows: Defendants shall produce (1) documents sufficient to show, for the four relevant products during the relevant period, requests for proposals, specifications, and responses to both; and (2) documents sufficient to show the costs of producing and revenues from the four relevant products during the relevant period. As to Plaintiff's application to compel Defendants to produce documents in categories 3, 4, and 5, Defendants shall perform further searches for responsive documents and produce what they find. Additionally, Plaintiff will examine witnesses at dep osition about the existence of any such documents. Plaintiff may renew the motion to compel production of documents in those three categories if it learns of the existence of such documents that Defendants do not produce. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate ECF 69. All parties to bear their own costs. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Robyn F. Tarnofsky on 8/30/2024) (vfr)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
MCKEON ROLLING STEEL DOOR CO., INC.,
Plain�ff,

23-CV- 08720 (ALC) (RFT)
ORDER

-againstU.S. SMOKE & FIRE CORP., et al.,
Defendants.
ROBYN F. TARNOFSKY, United States Magistrate Judge:

On August 23, 2024, Plaintiff submitted a letter motion seeking the Court’s intervention
in a discovery dispute. (See ECF 69.) I held a conference with the parties on August 29, 2024 to
address the issues raised in Plaintiff’s letter motion.
For the reasons set forth at the conference, Plaintiff’s motion to compel discovery is
GRANTED and resolved as follows: Defendants shall produce (1) documents sufficient to show,
for the four relevant products during the relevant period, requests for proposals, specifications,
and responses to both; and (2) documents sufficient to show the costs of producing and
revenues from the four relevant products during the relevant period.
As to Plaintiff’s application to compel Defendants to produce documents in categories 3,
4, and 5, Defendants shall perform further searches for responsive documents and produce
what they find. Additionally, Plaintiff will examine witnesses at deposition about the existence
of any such documents. Plaintiff may renew the motion to compel production of documents in
those three categories if it learns of the existence of such documents that Defendants do not
produce.

The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate ECF 69. All parties to bear their
own costs.
DATED: August 30, 2024
New York, New York
SO ORDERED.
__________________________
ROBYN F. TARNOFSKY
United States Magistrate Judge