Williams v. Bimbo Foods Bakeries Distribution, Inc.

Filing 30

ORDER granting 29 Motion to Stay Third Party Subpoenas Pending Outcome of a Hearing on Motion to Quash. The briefing schedule as to Motion to Quash 28 is expedited as follows: Plaintiff's Response is due on or before 7/18/11 at 12:00 pm; Defendant's Reply brief is due on or before 7/21/11 at 12:00 pm. Signed by Magistrate Judge David Keesler on 7/13/11. (gpb)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
CHARLOTTE DIVISION
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:10-CV-167-DCK
KENNETH S. WILLIAMS,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
BIMBO FOODS BAKERIES DISTRIBUTION, )
INC. f/k/a GEORGE WESTON BAKERIES
)
DISTRIBUTION, INC.,
)
)
Defendant.
)
________________________________________ )

ORDER

THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE COURT on Defendant’s “Motion To Stay Third Party
Subpoenas Pending Outcome Of A Hearing On Motion To Quash” (Document No. 29). The parties
have consented to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), and immediate
review of this motion is appropriate. Having carefully considered the motion, the record, and
applicable authority, the undersigned will grant the motion.
On or about Monday, July 11, 2011, Plaintiff served seven third party subpoenas requiring
the production of various documents at 10:00 a.m. on Monday, July 18, 2011, by the following
companies: Stokesdale Bi-Lo, Inc., Food Lion, LLC, Delhaize America, LLC, Harris Teeter, Inc.,
Bi-Lo, LLC, BJ’s Membership Club, Inc., and Lowe’s Food Stores, Inc. (Document No. 28, p.2;
Document No. 28-1, pp.2-29). On July 12, 2011, Defendant filed an “...Emergency Motion To
Quash Third Party Subpoenas” (Document No. 28) requesting that these subpoenas be quashed and
that further discovery in this action by Plaintiff be limited. On July 13, 2011, Defendant filed the
instant “Motion To Stay Third Party Subpoenas...” (Document No. 29).
Under the circumstances, the undersigned finds that a STAY of the seven subpoenas

(Document No. 28-1) is appropriate until the Court is able to rule on the pending motion to quash
those subpoenas.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that Defendant’s “Motion To Stay Third Party
Subpoenas Pending Outcome Of A Hearing On Motion To Quash” (Document No. 29) is
GRANTED. The above named companies are therefore STAYED from responding to the
subpoenas in this matter until the Court rules otherwise.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the briefing schedule regarding the pending “...Motion
To Quash Third Party Subpoenas” (Document No. 28) is expedited as follows: Plaintiff shall file
a response to the motion on or before July 18, 2011 at 12:00 p.m., and Defendant shall file a brief
in reply on or before July 21, 2011 at 12:00 p.m. The Court will determine at a later date whether
or not to hold a hearing on the motion to quash.
SO ORDERED.

Signed: July 13, 2011

2