The opinion of the court was delivered by: Joe Billy McDADE United States Senior District Judge
Friday, 21 December, 2012 09:43:28 AM Clerk, U.S. District Court, ILCD
The parties have failed to reach a settlement through mediation with Magistrate Judge Gorman, so this matter is now ready for final pretrial conference and trial. The parties submitted a joint status report on December 18, 2012, outlining the remaining issues and requesting until January 22, 2013 to supplement their prior discovery responses and initial disclosures. (Doc. 254). The Court agrees with the parties' statement of the remaining issues as set forth in their status report. (Doc. 254 at 2-3). The purpose of this Order is to inform the parties of the Court's expectations for pretrial procedures in this matter.
The Court grants the parties until January 3, 2013 to supplement their discovery responses and initial disclosures. The parties have been litigating this case since April 2010, and the supplementation of discovery is an ongoing obligation. There is no reason the parties need an additional five weeks just to supplement their discovery responses; two weeks should be more than sufficient. On January 3, 2012, the parties shall each submit briefs outlining their good faith estimates of the damages available in this case, as well as the specific legal basis for such estimates.
The Court will hold a status conference on January 4, 2013, at which it will set the dates for the final pretrial conference and trial. The Court anticipates that the final pretrial conference will be held during the week of January 21, and that the trial will be held the week of February 11, 2013.
Plaintiff claims that Defendants violated the Electronic Communications Privacy Act ("ECPA"), 18 U.S.C. § 2511, the Illinois Eavesdropping Statute, 720 ILL.
COMP. STAT. § 5/14-1 et seq., and the Stored Communications Act ("SCA"), 18 U.S.C. § 2701 by intercepting, monitoring, and/or accessing (1) his Access2Go-provided email account, (2) his Yahoo! web-based email account, and (3) his text messages on his Blackberry device. As the parties outlined in their status report, the only issues remaining are:
- Whether Access2Go authorized Defendants' interception of Plaintiff's Access2Go email such that the interception was in the ordinary course of Access2Go's business
- Whether Plaintiff consented to interception of either email account Count II -- Illinois Eavesdropping Statute*fn2
- Whether Plaintiff had a reasonable expectation of privacy in any of the communications
- Whether Defendants accessed Plaintiff's Yahoo! email - Whether they had authority to ...