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.

Shuffle Tech International LLC v. Wolff Gaming

United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois


August 16, 2012

SHUFFLE TECH INTERNATIONAL LLC
v.
WOLFF GAMING, INC.

Name of Assigned Judge Sitting Judge if Other or Magistrate Judge Blanche M. Manning than Assigned Judge Young B. Kim

CASE TITLE

DOCKET ENTRY TEXT

Status hearing and motion hearing held. For the reasons stated in open court and as detailed below, Defendant-Counter-Plaintiff's motion to compel discovery [40] is granted in part and denied in part. Plaintiff has until August 31, 2012, to comply with this order. A status hearing is scheduled for September 14, 2012, at 11:00 a.m. in courtroom 1944D. At the next status hearing, parties are to report on whether Plaintiff has complied with this order and whether they would like to schedule a settlement conference. Parties are ordered to schedule the deposition of party representatives, agents and employees by September 7, 2012, to be completed by October 5, 2012. Parties are not required to schedule the deposition of third-party witnesses at this time.

O[ For further details see text below.] Notices mailed by Judicial staff.

STATEMENT

Defendant-Counter-Plaintiff Wolff Gaming, Inc.'s motion to compel discovery is granted in part and denied in part. In its motion, Wolff seeks to compel Plaintiff Shuffle Tech International LLC to supplement its answers to Interrogatory ## 6-9 and Requests to Produce ## 1-10, 15, 17-23.

Interrogatories

The motion is granted as to # 6. Plaintiff is ordered to supplement its answers and provide the necessary contact information of the individuals listed in its answer and to provide detailed information about the funding received from Robert Saucier and Kevin Thorton. The motion is denied as to # 7 but Plaintiff is ordered to clarify its answer and identify the specific documents (with their corresponding bates-stamp numbers) that reflect the responsive answers to this interrogatory. The motion is granted in part as to # 8 to the extent that Plaintiff is ordered to provide information about the agreements it entered into with others after April 2010 regarding its product identified as "CW-1 Professional Fully Automatic Flush Mounted Card Shuffler" on its website and any other shufflers designed for professional use. Plaintiff may respond to this interrogatory by producing a copy of the relevant agreements to Wolff. The motion is granted as to # 9. Plaintiff is ordered to provide the underlying calculations and data for its damages figure of $198,333 per month.

Requests to Produce

The motion is denied as to ## 1, 2 and 3 because the bank and financial records Wolff seeks are not relevant to the claims or defenses in this matter. The motion is denied as to ## 4 and 5. The motion is granted as to ## 6, 7, and 8. Plaintiff is ordered to supplement its response as these requests are not limited to documents reflecting its communications about the subject matters identified in these requests. The motion is granted in part as to ## 9 and 15. Plaintiff is ordered to produce the sales information Wolff seeks in these two interrogatories, covering the period from April 2010 to the date of disclosure, pertaining to its product identified as CW-1 on its website and any other shufflers designed for professional use. If the information (or documents) responsive to these interrogatories is deemed confidential, parties are to agree on a protective order and file a motion seeking the entry of the same. The motion is denied as to # 10 and 18-23. The motion is denied as to # 17 without prejudice.

20120816

© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.



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.