2:21-cv-01125•Palczynsky et al v. Oil Patch Group, Inc.
Gesamter Gesetzestext
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO JOSHUA PALCZYNSKY, et al, individually and on behalf of all class members and those similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. OIL PATCH GROUP, INC., Defendant, RUSCO OPERATING, LLC, Intervenor. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil Action No. 2:21-cv-01125 DHU-KRS ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART [178] DEFENDANT OIL PATCH GROUP, INC.’S MOTION TO COMEPL AND DETERMINE SUFFICIENCY For the reasons stated at the Motions Hearing held on December 2, 2025, Defendant Oil Patch Group, Inc.’s Motion to Compel and Determine Sufficiency (“Motion”) (Doc. 178) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART as follows: The Motion is granted as to Oil Patch Group, Inc.’s request to serve up to twenty-five (25) Interrogatories and twenty-five (25) Requests for Admission per named Plaintiff and opt-in Plaintiff. Defendant shall serve Plaintiffs with revised Interrogatories and Requests for Admission within ten days of entry by the Court of an amended Scheduling Order reflecting these new limits. Each named Plaintiff and each opt-in Plaintiff shall serve individual responses within thirty (30) days of being served with Defendant’s revised Interrogatories and Requests for Admission. The Motion is denied without prejudice as to Oil Patch Group, Inc.’s request for an order compelling Plaintiffs to provide individualized responses to Defendant’s Requests for Production. The parties are directed to meet and confer regarding any continuing objections Defendant has to Case 2:21-cv-01125-DHU-KRS Document 185 Filed 12/02/25 Page 1 of 2
2 Plaintiffs’ previously served responses within fourteen (14) days of entry of this Order. Should the parties be unable to reach agreement on any matter discussed during the meet and confer, Defendant shall have fifteen (15) days thereafter to file another motion to compel, which shall comply with D.N.M. LR-Civ. 37.1 and shall identify with specificity which responses to the Requests for Production Defendant finds objectionable and why. IT IS SO ORDERED this 2nd day of December, 2025. __________________________________ KEVIN R. SWEAZEA UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Case 2:21-cv-01125-DHU-KRS Document 185 Filed 12/02/25 Page 2 of 2
Was bedeutet dieser Text für Ihre Situation?
Kostenlose und unverbindliche Beratung
Schildern Sie uns Ihre Situation. Unser Team meldet sich per E-Mail bei Ihnen für Ihre Beratung.
Setzen Sie Ihre Recherche in ChatGPT oder Claude fort
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.