Anitei v. Port of Seattle

Filing 67

MINUTE ORDER striking dft's 39 Motion for Protective Order; striking in part and denying in part pltf's 55 Motion to Compel; striking as moot pltf's 60 Motion for Relief by Judge Thomas S. Zilly.(RS)

1
2
3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

4
5

VASILICA CECILIA ANITEI,

6

Plaintiff,

7

C13-545 TSZ
v.

8

MINUTE ORDER
PORT OF SEATTLE,

9

Defendant.
10
The following Minute Order is made by direction of the Court, the Honorable
11 Thomas S. Zilly, United States District Judge:
12

(1)
Defendant’s motion for protective order, docket no. 39, is STRICKEN. In
its motion, defendant sought a protective order as to the depositions of, and documents
13 sought from, eight employees of the Port of Seattle, as well as defendant’s expert
Douglas Robinson, M.D. Counsel for defendant has since represented to the Court that
14 all of these depositions have been conducted and that the requested documents have been
produced or do not exist. Augenthaler Decl. at ¶¶ 3 & 4 (docket no. 59). Defendant’s
15 motion is therefore moot.
16

(2)
Plaintiff’s motion to compel discovery, docket no. 55, is STRICKEN in
part and DENIED in part as follows. 1

17

(i)
With respect to the depositions of, and documents sought from,
specific employees of the Port of Seattle, plaintiff’s motion is STRICKEN as moot
for the same reasons discussed in Paragraph 1, above. With respect to the

18
19
20

1

Although the motion to compel was untimely filed and improperly noted for the second Friday
after filing, the Court has considered it on its merits. The motion to compel was renoted by the
21 case administrator to the third Friday after filing, and defendant had sufficient opportunity to,
and did, respond. Plaintiff’s related “ex parte” motion for extension, docket no. 60, is therefore
22 STRICKEN as moot.

23
MINUTE ORDER - 1

1

deposition of defendant’s expert Douglas Robinson, M.D., plaintiff’s motion is
likewise STRICKEN as moot.

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

(ii)
To the extent that plaintiff’s motion seeks an order compelling
Dr. Robinson to produce documents, plaintiff’s motion is DENIED. The Court is
persuaded that Dr. Robinson has interposed appropriate objections to the requests
set forth in the subpoena duces tecum served on March 25, 2014. See Objection
(docket no. 46). Plaintiff’s counsel has not provided the requisite notice to
Dr. Robinson of the motion to compel, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(d)(2)(B)(i); see also
Proof of Service (docket no. 56-5), and has not explained why plaintiff would be
entitled to a copy of the copyrighted and contractually protected Minnesota
Mutiphasic Personality Inventory (“MMPI”) questionnaire or to copies of all
expert reports Dr. Robinson has ever prepared.
(iii) To the extent that plaintiff requests sanctions, the motion is DENIED
in part and STRICKEN in part. With regard to the depositions set in late March,
the Court is satisfied that the employees of the Port of Seattle and Dr. Robinson
had a good faith basis to believe that they had not been properly served and were
therefore not required to appear for such depositions, and the related motion for
attorney fees and costs is DENIED. As to the alleged evasiveness or lack of
cooperation of certain deponents and the various accusations about defendant’s
attorney’s conduct during depositions, the motion for sanctions is STRICKEN as
improperly raised for the first time in the reply brief, thereby inhibiting defendant
from offering any response.
(3)
record.

The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this Minute Order to all counsel of

Dated this 3rd day of June, 2014.
William M. McCool
Clerk

16
17

s/Claudia Hawney
Deputy Clerk

18
19
20
21
22
23
MINUTE ORDER - 2