Getty Images Inc v. Motamedi
ORDER granting in part and denying in part Plaintiff's 60 Motion to Compel Defendant to Answer Deposition Questions and for Sanctions. Signed by Judge Richard A Jones. (TH)
THE HONORABLE RICHARD A. JONES
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
GETTY IMAGES, INC., a Delaware
Case No. 2:16-cv-1892
ROXANNE MOTAMEDI, an individual,
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff Getty Images, Inc.’s (“Getty”)
motion to compel Defendant Roxanne Motamedi to answer deposition questions and for
sanctions. Dkt. # 60. The Court has considered the papers filed in support of and in
opposition to this motion and finds oral argument unnecessary.
The Court is increasingly disappointed with the breakdown in civility between the
parties and their counsel. The gamesmanship displayed on both sides is distressing.
Needless to say, the Court finds the parties’ litigation strategy both inefficient and
The Court does not find Defendant in contempt at this time and will not issue
sanctions. However, if the Court is presented with similar circumstances in the future, it
will reconsider its leniency toward both Defendant and her counsel.
The Court grants Plaintiff’s request to direct Defendant to sit for another deposition
in Bellevue, Washington. The Court expects Defendant to prepare for this deposition—
something her attorney claims she did in the past—and to answer Plaintiff’s questions
truthfully and completely—something the Court agrees she failed to do at the last
deposition. Plaintiff has ten hours to complete this deposition. However, the Court will
consider granting Plaintiff additional time if there is clear evidence that Defendant has
engaged in delay tactics.
The Court will hold a teleconference three days prior to the scheduled deposition.
Ms. Motamedi, her counsel, and Plaintiff’s counsel who is taking the deposition are required
to appear for the teleconference. The parties are directed to contact the courtroom deputy to
schedule this teleconference.
Each side will be responsible for their costs for the previous depositions and the
forthcoming one. However, the Court will consider imposing sanctions in the form of costs
should the parties continue to make a mockery of the discovery process.
Additionally, the Court encourages the parties to consider mediation.
In sum, the Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Plaintiff’s motion. Dkt. #
Dated this 7th day of September, 2017.
The Honorable Richard A. Jones
United States District Judge
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?