Koshani v. Barton et al (TWP2)

Filing 120

ORDER: The parties appeared before the Court via telephone on November 14, 2018, for a conference regarding a discovery related dispute. During the conference, Defendants stated that the Court did not enter an amended Scheduling Order. The Court observes that the previous Order 91 stated, "All other unexpired deadlines, from the date of Defendants' Motion, shall be recalculated to the new trial date." The Court further ORDERS that special requests for jur y instructions shall be submitted to the Court no later than thirty (30) days before trial and shall be supported by citations of authority pursuant to Local Rule 7.4. There is reserved to counsel for the respective parties the right to submit supplemental requests for instructions during the course of the trial or at the conclusion of trial upon matters that cannot be reasonably anticipated. Signed by Magistrate Judge H. Bruce Guyton on 11/29/18. (ADA)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
AT KNOXVILLE
SHAFIQULLAH KOSHANI,
Plaintiff,
v.
ERIC WAYNE BARTON and VANQUISH
WORLDWIDE, LLC,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 3:17-CV-265-TWP-HBG

ORDER
This case is before the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), the Rules of this Court,
and Standing Order 13-02.
The parties appeared before the Court via telephone on November 14, 2018, for a
conference regarding a discovery related dispute. Attorney Tillman Finley appeared on behalf of
Plaintiff. Attorneys Garrett Swartwood and Michael Maloney appeared on behalf of Defendants.
Specifically, Plaintiff raised issues with respect to the sufficiency of Defendants’ responses to
discovery. Defendants stated that they responded to Plaintiff’s discovery requests but would
supplement if necessary. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Court instructed Plaintiff to send
the undersigned a copy of the discovery requests with the responses thereto in order to determine
whether Defendants complied with their discovery obligations.
The Court has now reviewed the responses from both Defendants Barton and Vanquish
Worldwide, LLC (“Vanquish”). As an initial matter, the Court notes that a majority of Defendants’
responses simply reference a number of documents. Johnson Marcraft, Inc v. W. Sur. Co., No.
3:15-CV-01482, 2016 WL 3655299, at *2 (M.D. Tenn. July 8, 2016) (“Generally, referencing a

mass of documents or records does not comply with Rule 33(d).”). Accordingly, the Court finds
that Defendants’ responses to the following discovery requests are deficient:
Defendant Vanquish Worldwide, LLC’s Supplemental Responses to
Plaintiff’s First Set of Interrogatories: Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 9.
Further, the Court finds that the response to Interrogatory No. 8 is
deficient because it does not identify any assets.
Defendant Eric Barton’s Supplemental Responses to Plaintiff’s First
Set of Interrogatories: No. 3.
Defendants shall supplement their responses to the above discovery requests within ten
(10) days of entry of this Order. The Court has also reviewed Defendant Vanquish’s Second
Amended Supplemental Response to Plaintiff’s Second Set of Interrogatories Nos. 11-14. The
Court finds Defendant Vanquish’s responses, which cite an attached addendum, sufficient at this
time. The addendum provides the revenue, direct costs, indirect costs, and net income for each
contract, which is the information that the interrogatories request. In addition, the Court finds
Defendant Vanquish’s Supplemental Response to No. 20 of Plaintiff’s Second Set of
Interrogatories adequate.

Further, the Court declines to award sanctions at this time, but

ADMONISHES Defendants that a violation of the instant Order will result in sanctions. See Fed.
R. Civ. P. 37(b).
Finally, during the conference, Defendants stated that the Court did not enter an amended
Scheduling Order. The Court observes that the previous Order [Doc. 91] stated, “All other
unexpired deadlines, from the date of Defendants’ Motion, shall be recalculated to the new trial
date.” The Court further ORDERS that special requests for jury instructions shall be submitted
to the Court no later than thirty (30) days before trial and shall be supported by citations of
authority pursuant to Local Rule 7.4. There is reserved to counsel for the respective parties the

2

right to submit supplemental requests for instructions during the course of the trial or at the
conclusion of trial upon matters that cannot be reasonably anticipated.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
ENTER:

United States Magistrate Judge

3