Campania Mgmt. Inc. v. Rooks, Pitts Poust

Holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a motion to extend discovery filed nine days after the close of discovery

Rossetto v. Pabst Brewing Company

Finding a latent ambiguity where a parallel CBA with the brewery workers' union was amended to explicitly limit health-care benefits to the "term of agreement," while the CBA of the plaintiffs machinists' union was renewed without such a limitation

Reinsdorf v. Skechers U.S.A., Inc.

Noting the non-spoliating party must show "that the evidence would have been helpful in proving its claims or defenses - i.e., that the innocent party is prejudiced without the evidence"

In re Sulfuric Acid Antitrust Litig.

Finding untimely motion to compel can only succeed by showing actual and substantial prejudice.

Lasercomb America, Inc. v. Reynolds

Holding the copyright holder misused its copyright by including in licensing agreements a provision that neither the licensee company nor its officers, employees, et al., could develop competing goods for the term of the agreement, ninety-nine years

Kidwiler v. Progressive Paloverde Ins. Co.

Holding the magistrate judge appropriately "narrowed and defined" the RFP request for "[a]ll financial incentive agreements which in any way relate to profitability and/or claim performance" to "documents relating to profit-sharing or profits" (alteration in original)

Haviland v. Catholic Health Initiatives-Iowa

Holding that defendant did not have to disclose results of counsel's investigation into whether plaintiffs should be paid for missed lunches in FLSA collective action raising good-faith defense, as the investigation was protected work product and defendant stated they would not be relying on the results as part of its defense

Dauska v. Green Bay Packaging Inc.

Granting motion to compel in part and awarding partial expenses to substantially prevailing plaintiff under Rule 37(C), while characterizing defendant's arguments in opposition as "baseless" and plaintiff's requests as "overly broad"

In re Sulfuric Acid Antitrust Litigation

Hyland v. HomeServices of Am., Inc.

Holding that plaintiffs' motion to compel was untimely and noting that plaintiffs failed to articulate any justification for their failure to do so until six months after the defendants' responses were served and ten days before the close of discovery

Rule 1 - Scope and Purpose

Recognizing the federal rules of civil procedure should be employed to promote the "just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding"

Rule 34 - Producing Documents, Electronically Stored Information, and Tangible Things, or Entering onto Land, for Inspection and Other Purposes

Finding that the rules related to electronic discovery were "not meant to create a routine right of direct access to a party's electronic information system, although such access may be justified in some circumstances."