De Dios De Los Santos v. Shree Laxmi Restaurant, Inc.

USDC SDNY DOCUMENT UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ELECTRONICALLY FILED SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DOC #: rents nnn nnn cn nnn nnn mannan ann cnnn nnn nnn DATE FILED: 3/29/2023 FRANCISCO DE DIOS DE LOS SANTOS and LUIS VICTORIANO DE JESUS, Plaintiffs, -against- 22-CV-10774 (PAE) (KHP) SHREE LAXMI RESTAURANT, INC. d/b/a ORDER SWAGAT RESTAURANT; ABISHEK SHARMA; and LALA R. SHARMA, Defendants. +--+ -------- += □□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□ KATHARINE H. PARKER, United States Magistrate Judge: On March 28, 2023, the parties appeared for an Initial Case Management Conference.

After review of the pleadings and consultation with the parties, the following Scheduling Order is entered pursuant to Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure: Pleadings, Parties, and Motions. The parties shall have until Friday, April 28, 2023 to amend the pleadings and join parties. No further amendments or joinder of parties thereafter absent good cause.

Discovery. The deadline to complete all discovery is Tuesday, October 10, 2023. An electronic discovery protocol shall be finalized by Thursday, May 11, 2023. Initial requests for production and initial sets of interrogatories shall be served by Monday, June 12, 2023. All subsequent interrogatories must be served by Monday, September 11, 2023. The deadline to complete any expert discovery is Monday, September 18, 2023. The deadline for depositions is Thursday, September 28, 2023 and depositions are limited to five depositions per party.

Requests for admissions shall be made by Tuesday, October 3, 2023. The parties may agree to adjust the interim discovery deadlines without seeking approval from the Court.

Discovery Disputes. The parties shall follow the Court’s Individual Procedures with respect to any discovery disputes. See https://nysd.uscourts.gov/hon-katharine-h-parker.

Rule 1 and Rule 26(b)(1). Counsel shall comply with Rule 1 and Rule 26(b)(1) in the conduct of discovery.

Document Requests. Counsel shall be fully familiar with their obligations under Rules and 26(g) and consider and discuss ways to ensure compliance and minimize disputes regarding overbreadth and specificity of requests and responses. A failure to comply with this responsibility carries serious consequences. Requests for any and all documents on a broad topic are presumptively improper. Likewise, courts have held that an objection that does not appropriately explain its grounds is forfeited. See, e.g., Fischer v. Forrest, 2017 WL 773694 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 28, 2017) (“[A]ny discovery response that does not comply with Rule 34’s requirement to state objections with specificity (and to clearly indicate whether responsive material is being withheld on the basis of objection) will be deemed a waiver of all objections (except as to privilege).”).

Status Letter. On Friday, May 12, 2023, the parties shall file a joint status letter updating the Court on the status of discovery. The parties shall note in the letter whether they would like the Court to schedule a settlement conference.

SO ORDERED.

DATED: New York, New York Ketharice H fenken March 29, 2023 KATHARINE H. PARKER United States Magistrate Judge