Hales
Tri Tool, Inc. v. Hales
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 TRI TOOL, INC., Case No. 2:22-cv-01515-DAD-CSK Plaintiff, v. ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND
DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
THAD HALES, et al., TO COMPEL Defendants. (ECF No. 69) 16 Plaintiff Tri Tool, Inc. moves to compel Defendant Enerpac Tool Group Corp. (“Enerpac”)1 to respond to Plaintiff’s requests for production of documents.2 Pl. Mot. Compel (ECF No. 69). Pursuant to Local Rule 251(a), the parties filed a notice of motion compelling discovery concurrently with their Joint Statement re Discovery Disagreement. See E.D. Cal. L.R. 251(a); ECF No. 69. On December 17, 2024, the Court held an in- person hearing. Attorney Philip Chan appeared for Plaintiff, and attorney James Carter appeared for Defendant Enerpac. For the reasons that follow, the Court GRANTS IN PART AND DENIES IN PART Plaintiff’s motion to compel. / / /
26 There are three Defendants in this case: Thad Hales, Mike Bracikowski, and…