There was a problem locating the requested document.
Page 1
Case 1:03-cv-02461-MSK-MEH Document95 _ Filed 04/24/2006 Page 1 of3 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 03-MK-2461 MSK-MEH LEPRINO FOODS COMPANY, Plaintiff, V.
FELDMEIER EQUIPMENT, INC,
Defendant.
MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY
The Defendant, Feldmeier Equipment, Inc., by its attorneys, Fowler, Schimberg & Flanagan, P.C., pursuant to F.R.C.P. Rule 37, submits its Motion to Compel Discovery as follows:
I. Certification Defendant has requested Plaintiff to respond to the below discovery requests on several occasions now. The most recent being April 7, 2006. Plaintiff has failed to respond to these requests forcing Defendant to file this Motion.
II. Argument Defendant took the deposition of Leprino Waverly Project Engineer, Ritch Swetland, on June 29, 2005, During the course of that deposition, Defendant learned that Leprino had issued a request for bid to numerous silo manufacturers; that a number of manufacturers responded; that an “Approval for Expenditure (AFE)” was drafted and approved and only then the Feldmeier silo was purchased. This chain of documents have never been produced and is needed as Defendant
Page 2
Case 1:03-cv-02461-MSK-MEH Document95 Filed 04/24/2006 Page 2of3 wants to see what Leprino specified in its bid and how other competitor manufacturers responded to the same. Swetland also testified there was a “project file” though such file has never been produced. Both Mr. Blanchard (plant engineer} and Mr. Swetland testified that in the future the plan may be modified and that plans were in the works, however, no such plans have been produced. All of these documents are relevant and should have been produced by virtue of disclosure or response to written discovery.
Defendant specifically requested the above-referenced documents during the abovereferenced depositions. Defendant followed up on that request several times over the last 8 . months. Defendant also raised the issue at the last hearing on its previously filed Motion to Compel. Said Motion was granted, but the documents have never been produced. WHEREFORE, Defendant Feldmeier Equipment, Inc. respectfully requests the Court enter an Order compelling the documents discussed herein.
Respectfully submitted this 24" day of April, 2006.
s/ Catherine A. Tallerico Catherine A. Tallerico, Esq.
Timothy J. Flanagan, Esq.
1640 Grant Street Denver, Colorado 80203 Telephone: 303.298.8603 ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT bo
Page 3
Case 1:03-cv-02461-MSK-MEH Document95 _~ Filed 04/24/2006 Page3of3
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on this 24" day of April, 2006, I caused a true and correct copy of the foregoing F.R.C.P. RULE 37, SUBMITS ITS MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY was filed with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system, which will send notification of such filing to the following email addresses:
Michael G, Bohn, Esq.
mbohn@campbelibohn.com
Mr. Jake Feldmeter jake@feldmeier,com
s/ Michelle Rocke
PDF Page 1
PlainSite Cover Page
PDF Page 2
Case 1:03-cv-02461-MSK-MEH Document95 _ Filed 04/24/2006 Page 1 of3
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 03-MK-2461 MSK-MEH
LEPRINO FOODS COMPANY,
Plaintiff,
V.
FELDMEIER EQUIPMENT, INC,
Defendant.
MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY
The Defendant, Feldmeier Equipment, Inc., by its attorneys, Fowler, Schimberg &
Flanagan, P.C., pursuant to F.R.C.P. Rule 37, submits its Motion to Compel Discovery as
follows:
I. Certification
Defendant has requested Plaintiff to respond to the below discovery requests on several
occasions now. The most recent being April 7, 2006. Plaintiff has failed to respond to these
requests forcing Defendant to file this Motion.
II. Argument
Defendant took the deposition of Leprino Waverly Project Engineer, Ritch Swetland, on
June 29, 2005, During the course of that deposition, Defendant learned that Leprino had issued a
request for bid to numerous silo manufacturers; that a number of manufacturers responded; that
an “Approval for Expenditure (AFE)” was drafted and approved and only then the Feldmeier silo
was purchased. This chain of documents have never been produced and is needed as Defendant
PDF Page 3
Case 1:03-cv-02461-MSK-MEH Document95 Filed 04/24/2006 Page 2of3
wants to see what Leprino specified in its bid and how other competitor manufacturers responded
to the same. Swetland also testified there was a “project file” though such file has never been
produced. Both Mr. Blanchard (plant engineer} and Mr. Swetland testified that in the future the
plan may be modified and that plans were in the works, however, no such plans have been
produced. All of these documents are relevant and should have been produced by virtue of
disclosure or response to written discovery.
Defendant specifically requested the above-referenced documents during the above-
referenced depositions. Defendant followed up on that request several times over the last 8
. months. Defendant also raised the issue at the last hearing on its previously filed Motion to
Compel. Said Motion was granted, but the documents have never been produced.
WHEREFORE, Defendant Feldmeier Equipment, Inc. respectfully requests the Court
enter an Order compelling the documents discussed herein.
Respectfully submitted this 24" day of April, 2006.
s/ Catherine A. Tallerico
Catherine A. Tallerico, Esq.
Timothy J. Flanagan, Esq.
1640 Grant Street
Denver, Colorado 80203
Telephone: 303.298.8603
ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT
bo
PDF Page 4
Case 1:03-cv-02461-MSK-MEH Document95 _~ Filed 04/24/2006 Page3of3
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on this 24" day of April, 2006, I caused a true and correct copy of
the foregoing F.R.C.P. RULE 37, SUBMITS ITS MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY
was filed with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system, which will send notification of
such filing to the following email addresses:
Michael G, Bohn, Esq.
mbohn@campbelibohn.com
Mr. Jake Feldmeter
jake@feldmeier,com
s/ Michelle Rocke
Third party AI contribution in government documents
Possible
Document content is reproduced directly from government sources. Some filings in our database may themselves contain AI-generated content submitted by third parties to government agencies.
Back to 
