Case 6:22-cv-02417-RBD-LHP Document 42 Filed 02/22/24 Page 1 of 5 PageID 1863
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
`ORLANDO DIVISION
`
`
`
`DISNEY ENTERPRISES, INC.,
`LUCASFILM LTD. LLC and
`LUCASFILM ENTERTAINMENT
`COMPANY LTD. LLC,
`
`
`
`v.
`
`THE SECRET DIS GROUP LLC,
`POPSELLA INC., CHRISTOPHER B.
`MARTIN and HANNAH MARTIN,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`Defendants
`
`Case No: 6:22-cv-2417-RBD-LHP
`
`
`
`
`ORDER SCHEDULING DEFENDANTS’ DEPOSITIONS
`
`By Order dated February 14, 2024, the Court granted in part Plaintiffs’ motion
`
`to compel Defendants’ compliance with discovery and ordered, among other
`
`things, that the discovery period would be extended through March 13, 2024 for the
`
`limited purpose of conducting Defendants’ depositions in this case. Doc. No. 40,
`
`at 17–19. The Court ordered lead counsel for the parties to meet and confer within
`
`seven (7) days regarding scheduling Defendants’ depositions, and to file a joint
`
`notice setting forth the date, time, place, and location of Defendants’ depositions by
`
`that same deadline. Id. at 21. The Court warned that if the parties were unable to
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
`ORLANDO DIVISION
`
`
`
`DISNEY ENTERPRISES, INC.,
`LUCASFILM LTD. LLC and
`LUCASFILM ENTERTAINMENT
`COMPANY LTD. LLC,
`
`
`
`v.
`
`THE SECRET DIS GROUP LLC,
`POPSELLA INC., CHRISTOPHER B.
`MARTIN and HANNAH MARTIN,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`Defendants
`
`Case No: 6:22-cv-2417-RBD-LHP
`
`
`
`
`ORDER SCHEDULING DEFENDANTS’ DEPOSITIONS
`
`By Order dated February 14, 2024, the Court granted in part Plaintiffs’ motion
`
`to compel Defendants’ compliance with discovery and ordered, among other
`
`things, that the discovery period would be extended through March 13, 2024 for the
`
`limited purpose of conducting Defendants’ depositions in this case. Doc. No. 40,
`
`at 17–19. The Court ordered lead counsel for the parties to meet and confer within
`
`seven (7) days regarding scheduling Defendants’ depositions, and to file a joint
`
`notice setting forth the date, time, place, and location of Defendants’ depositions by
`
`that same deadline. Id. at 21. The Court warned that if the parties were unable to
`
`
`
`Case 6:22-cv-02417-RBD-LHP Document 42 Filed 02/22/24 Page 2 of 5 PageID 1864
`
`
`
`agree on deposition dates, the Court would schedule the depositions to occur at the
`
`courthouse, on dates and times convenient to the Court. Id. The Court further
`
`cautioned the parties that depositions conducted after the formal discovery
`
`completion date (March 4, 2024, see Doc. No. 17) would be unavailable for summary
`
`judgment purposes, including responses and replies. Id. (citing Doc. No. 17, at 10).
`
`Now before the Court is the parties’ Joint Notice Regarding Defendants’
`
`Depositions Pursuant to Court Order, which states that the parties have failed to
`
`agree on deposition dates. Doc. No. 41. In sum, although Defendants initially
`
`offered to have the depositions occur partially remotely on February 26–29, 2024,
`
`Plaintiffs rejected that offer. See Doc. No. 37, at 4. Only after the Court issued the
`
`February 14, 2024 Order did Plaintiffs change their mind, given the unavailability
`
`of depositions taken after the discovery completion date for summary judgment
`
`purposes. See Doc. No. 41, at 2. But now Defendants no longer wish to honor that
`
`prior offer, and Plaintiffs wish to have the Court compel it. See id. at 4–5. The
`
`Court is not inclined to do so, given that all parties have been aware of the
`
`requirements of the Case Management and Scheduling Order (“CMSO”) since
`
`March 16, 2023. Doc. No. 17.1
`
`
`1 Plaintiffs’ “disagree[ment] with the Court’s assessment of Plaintiffs’ lack of
`diligence concerning Defendant’s depositions” is unpersuasive. See Doc. No. 41, at 4 n.3.
`The Court’s reference to diligence concerned Plaintiffs’ apparent failure to serve any
`discovery in this case until almost eight (8) months after discovery began. Doc. No. 40, at
`18. And in any event, to the extent that Plaintiffs were having communication issues with
`
`
`
`- 2 -
`
`
`
`Case 6:22-cv-02417-RBD-LHP Document 42 Filed 02/22/24 Page 3 of 5 PageID 1865
`
`
`
`
`Consequently, the Court now must schedule Defendants’ depositions itself,
`
`which depositions the Court will require to be in person at the courthouse. See
`
`Doc. No. 40, at 21. It is therefore ORDERED as follows:
`
`1.
`
` Defendants The Secret Dis Group LLC, Popsella, Inc., Christopher B.
`
`Martin, and Hannah Martin are ORDERED to appear for in-person
`
`depositions at the United States Courthouse, 401 W. Central Boulevard,
`
`Orlando, Florida, on March 7, 8, and 11, 2024. Given the representation that
`
`Christopher B. Martin will be deposed both on his own behalf and on behalf
`
`of the two corporate entities (Doc. No. 41, at 5 n.5) those three depositions
`
`shall proceed on March 7 and 8, 2024, and Hannah Martin’s deposition shall
`
`proceed on March 11, 2024, unless otherwise agreed by the parties.
`
`2.
`
`The March 7, 8, and 11, 2024 depositions shall proceed in the witness
`
`rooms adjacent to Courtroom 5D. The witness rooms will be available from
`
`9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. on those dates. No party will be permitted access to
`
`the courtroom.
`
`3.
`
`The Court will not provide court reporter services, and the parties must
`
`supply their own court reporter for the depositions. The court reporter is
`
`authorized to bring into the courthouse stenographic equipment, including
`
`
`Defendants regarding scheduling depositions, Plaintiffs should have simply unilaterally
`notice the depositions. See Middle District Discovery § (II)(A) (2021).
`
`
`
`- 3 -
`
`
`
`Case 6:22-cv-02417-RBD-LHP Document 42 Filed 02/22/24 Page 4 of 5 PageID 1866
`
`
`
`
`
`
`but not limited to a laptop and cellphone, for purposes of the March 7, 8, and
`
`11, 2024 depositions to be conducted in the witness rooms adjacent to
`
`Courtroom 5D. The court reporter must provide a copy of this Order to the
`
`court security officers to enter the courthouse with their equipment. The
`
`equipment must be produced for inspection upon request.
`
`4.
`
`The March 7, 8, and 11, 2024 depositions will be treated as court
`
`proceedings. Accordingly, the parties must fully comply with all Local
`
`Rules, including Local Rules 2.01, 2.02, and 5.03. Only attorneys who are
`
`members admitted to the Bar of this Court and/or those specially admitted
`
`under Local Rule 2.01 will be permitted to conduct the depositions.
`
`5.
`
`Pursuant to Local Rule 7.02, no other persons may bring electronic
`
`devices into the courthouse, subject to the exceptions set forth in that Rule.
`
`6.
`
`The parties are reminded that the March 7, 8, and 11, 2024 depositions
`
`will be unavailable for summary judgment purposes, including responses
`
`and replies. See Doc. No. 17, at 10.2
`
`7.
`
`The Court treats the instant Order as a discovery Order, and thus, any
`
`failures to comply with the requirements set forth herein may result in
`
`sanctions against the offending party, that party’s counsel, or both. See
`
`Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(f); 37(b).
`
`
`2 Any stipulation by the parties to the contrary is ineffective.
`
`- 4 -
`
`
`
`Case 6:22-cv-02417-RBD-LHP Document 42 Filed 02/22/24 Page 5 of 5 PageID 1867
`
`
`
`
`DONE and ORDERED in Orlando, Florida on February 22, 2024.
`
`
`Copies furnished to:
`
`Counsel of Record
`Unrepresented Parties
`
`
`
`
`
`- 5 -
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
