Iannucci et al v. RiteAid Corporation

Filing 47

ORDER denying 39 Plaintiff's Motion for Explanation from the Court Regarding Order dated July 24, 2012. Signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis Howell on 09/07/2012 (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.)(thh)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
ASHEVILLE DIVISION
1:11cv281
MARGE IANNUCCI,

)
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
RITE AID CORPORATION,
)
)
Defendant.
)
___________________________________ )

ORDER

Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion for Explanation from the
Court Regarding Order dated July 24, 2012 [# 39]. Previously, the Court entered
an Order granting Defendant’s Motion to Compel [# 19] and Motion for Entry of a
Confidentiality Agreement [# 34], and granted in part Plaintiff’s Motion for
Extension of Time [# 33]. Plaintiff now requests that the Court vacate it’s prior
Order and consider her response in opposition to the Motion for Entry of a
Confidentiality Agreement. Having considered Plaintiff’s response, the Court
finds no reason to vacate the Confidentiality Agreement previously entered by the
Court. Defendant satisfied its burden of demonstrating good cause for the entry of
a blanket agreement addressing the disclosure of confidential documents during the
course of discovery. Accordingly, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s Motion for
-1-

Explanation from the Court Regarding Order dated July 24, 2012 [# 39].

Signed: September 7, 2012

-2-