Deol

VibrantCare Rehabilitation, Inc. v. Deol

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJanuary 11, 20242:20-cv-00791California1,941 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 VIBRANTCARE REHABILITATION, No. 2:20-cv-00791 MCE AC

INC.,

12 Plaintiff, ORDER v. 14 KIRAN DEOL, and John and Jane Does 1through 10, Defendants. 17 This action was filed on April 16, 2020. ECF No. 1. The operative First Amended Complaint is located at ECF No. 23. Presently before the court is plaintiff’s motion to compel a forensic examination of defendant Kiran Doel’s email and electronic devices. ECF No. 63. The parties filed the required joint statement, and several declarations in support of the joint statement. ECF Nos. 65, 66, 67, 68. Fact discovery in this action closes on February 7, 2024. ECF No. 59. The motion to compel was submitted on the papers. ECF No. 69. For or the reasons set forth below, the motion is DENIED. I. BACKGROUND Plaintiff VibrantCare is one of the largest providers of outpatient physical and occupational therapy services in the Western United States. ECF No. 23 at 2. …

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.