Court denies competing discovery motions where both parties contributed to delay and plaintiff has access to requested information
CIF Licensing, LLC, d/b/a GE Licensing v. Agere Systems Inc., Civ. No. 07-170-JJF, January 23, 2009.
Farnan, J. Court denies both plaintiff’s motion to compel and defendant’s motion for a protective order.
Latest discovery dispute arises from failed attempt by parties to resolve earlier discovery issues wherein Court had found both parties’ efforts to be insufficient and directed parties to confer and submit joint letter to the Court outlining remaining disputes. Plaintiff’s request to compel discovery is denied where it has adequate access to the requested information. Defendant’s motion for a protective order from untimely notice of deposition is denied since both parties contributed to the discovery delay.
