Heitkoetter

Heitkoetter v. Domm

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaOctober 29, 20241:22-cv-00368California4,854 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 MARKUS HEITKOETTER, et al., Case No. 1:22-cv-0368-KES-BAM Plaintiffs, ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND

DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFFS’

v. MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER KARL DOMM, (Doc. 113) Defendant. 16 17 Currently before the Court is the motion for a protective order filed by Plaintiffs Markus Heitkoetter and Rockwell Trading Services, LLC (“Rockwell”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs”). (Doc. 113.) Plaintiffs seek a protective order barring the deposition of Plaintiff Rockwell’s employee Mark Hodge and finding the document requests propounded upon Mr. Hodge are improper and need not be answered. (Doc. 113 at 3.) In the alternative, Plaintiffs seek to limit the scope of the deposition as described below. Defendant filed his opposition, requesting Plaintiffs’ motions to bar or limit Mr. Hodge’s deposition be denied, or if the Court permitted a remote deposition, that Plaintiffs be required to produce Mr.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.