IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
August 19, 2011
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, EX REL. JOE LIOTINE, PLAINTIFF,
CDW GOVERNMENT, INC., DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Donald G. Wilkerson United States Magistrate Judge
On November 4, 2010, Relator Joe Liotine conducted a deposition of CDW-G corporate representative Kevin Adams pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(b)(6). Relator asked the deponent a number of questions regarding price codes associated with sales transactions that are the basis of the lawsuit and that had been produced in initial discovery. On June 29, 2011, the Court ordered Defendant CDW-G to produce additional data about the transactions (Doc. 190). Defendant CDW-G produced that data as ordered.
Relator Liotine now requests a second Rule 30(b)(6) deposition to inquire about price codes contained in the newly-produced data. Defendant CDW-G objects to an additional Rule 30(b)(6) deposition arguing first, Kevin Adams is the only corporate representative capable of testifying about the information sought; second, Relator already had the opportunity to inquire about the price codes in its first deposition of Kevin Adams; and third, an additional deposition of Kevin Adams is unduly burdensome at this time.
A discovery dispute conference was held on August 19, 2011, before United States Magistrate Judge Donald G. Wilkerson. Based on the information provided to the Court at that conference, the Court finds that a second deposition of Kevin Adams would be unduly burdensome. The Court further finds that Relator may obtain the information sought by less burdensome means. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS the following:
1. Relator Joe Liotine is ordered to prepare written questions for a deposition by written questions pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 31.
2. Defendant CDW-G is ordered to produce answers to the written questions within seven (7) business days.
3. Defendant CDW-G is ordered to simultaneously file the answers with the Court. 4. The Court expects the parties to faithfully comply with its obligations under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.