Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Tropp v. Conair Corp.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK


July 2, 2010

DAVID A. TROPP, PLAINTIFF,
v.
CONAIR CORP., ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Roanne L. Mann, United States Magistrate Judge

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Currently pending before this Court is a letter dated June 30, 2010, from plaintiff's counsel ("Pl. Letter"), ECF Docket Entry ("DE") #208, regarding plaintiff's request for (1) a sixty-day extension of the discovery deadline; (2) a telephone conference regarding discovery sought from third-party Travel Sentry, Inc.; and (3) an order directing the rescheduling of mediation.

With respect to plaintiff's request for a sixty-day extension, plaintiff circulated an email to defense counsel on June 28, 2010, proposing such an extension, and has received no objection to his proposal. In a letter filed today, various defendants complain that the request is "premature," and request that the Court deny the application without prejudice. See Letter to the Court from Zachary W. Berk (July 2, 2010) ("Def. Letter") at 1, DE #209. Instead, the Court will give defendants until July 8, 2010, to file any objection with the Court.

With respect to the discovery sought from Travel Sentry, defense counsel -- who also represents Travel Sentry -- states that Travel Sentry will address Tropp's request "in a separate letter to the Court." Id. That letter shall be filed by July 6, 2010.

The Court grants plaintiff's final request: the ADR Clerk is respectfully requested to take steps to ensure that mediation is promptly commenced.*fn1

Finally, while seeking the Court's intervention on his own behalf, plaintiff has yet to file a response to two defense motions -- filed by Briggs & Riley and the Brookstone defendants -- for orders compelling plaintiff to respond to their discovery demands. See Letters to the Court (June 15 and 16, 2010), DE #205, 206.*fn2 However, based upon the letter filed today by defendants -- which was joined by Briggs & Riley and the Brookstone defendants, see Def. Letter at 1 -- it appears that plaintiff served discovery responses and produced documents on June 24, 2010. See id. at 2 n.2. Therefore, the two defense motions are denied as moot.

SO ORDERED.

ROANNE L. MANN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.