Giuffre_Maxwell_Batch5_p00017.png

Case 1:15-cv-07433-LAP Document 1330-2 Filed 01/05/24 Page 3 of 40 that you immediately withdraw those interrogatories. See Rule 33.3, Local Rules for the Southern District of New York; see also Shannon v. New York City Transit Auth., No. 00 CIV. 5079 (Sweet, J.), 2001 WL 286727, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 22, 2001); accord Gary Friedrich Enterprises, LLC v. Marvel Enterprises, Inc., No. 08 CIV. 1533 BSJ JCF, 2011 WL 1642381, at *4 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 26, 2011). Specifically, Rule 33.3 provides: (a) Unless otherwise ordered by the Court, at the commencement of discovery, interrogatories will be restricted to those seeking names of witnesses with knowledge of information relevant to the subject matter of the action, the computation of each category of damage alleged, and the existence, custodian, location and general description of relevant documents, including pertinent insurance agreements, and other physical evidence, or information of a similar nature. (b) During discovery, interrogatories other than those seeking information described in paragraph (a) above may only be served (1) if they are a more practical method of obtaining the information sought than a request for production or a deposition, or (2) if ordered by the Court. (c) At the conclusion of other discovery, and at least 30 days prior to the discovery cut-off date, interrogatories seeking the claims and contentions of the opposing party may be served unless the Court has ordered otherwise. Similarly, Requests for Production numbers 1, 2, 4, 6(i), 9, 12, 30, 35 and 37 also violate Local Rule 33.3 in that they rely on the offending interrogatory requests. The Rule provides that a party must first try to obtain discovery through document production and testimony. Discovery does not close in this case until July 1, 2016, and Defendant has not yet noticed a deposition. As such, these interrogatories violate Local Rule 33.3 and are premature. Defendant’s First Set of Discovery Requests also violates Rule 33, Fed. R. Civ. P., which provides “a party may serve on any other party no more than 25 interrogatories, including all discrete subparts” — in that Defendant has served a total of 59 interrogatories, including subparts, in violation of Rule 33. We ask that you immediately withdraw those interrogatories that exceed the 25 interrogatory limit set by Rule 33.