Free Reply to Response to Motion - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1 :04-cv-01304-KAJ Document 75 Filed 03/14/2006 Page 1 of 16
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW
Two EAST SEVENTH STREET
SUITE 302
WEMHWGTON, DELAWARE 19801-3707
www.NEUBERGERI.Aw.coM
EMAIL: [email protected]
THOMAS S. NEUBERGER, ESQUIRE PHONE: (302) 655-0582
STEPHEN J. NEUBERGER, ESQUIRE FAX: (302) 655-9329
March 14, 2006 Via CM/ECF Filing
The Honorable Kent A. Jordan
United States District Court
District of Delaware
844 King Street
Wilmington, DE 19801
RE: EEOC v. P.T. Morgan Paper Company, C.A.No. 04-1304-KAJ
Reply in Support of Defendant’s Motion to Quash Notice of Deposition
Dear Judge J ordan:
Yesterday, the EEOC submitted a letter in opposition to defendant’s motion to quash the
March 23, 2006 deposition. This is defendant’s reply in support its original motion. Plaintiffs have
given a false and skewed version of the parties’ communications and failed to address defendant’s offer
to extend the discovery period.
After the court’s summary judgment dismissals the EEOC noticed the depositions of four
witnesses. At that time no scheduling conflicts were apparent. However, two major conflicts arose.
First, the trial date for my New Jersey trial was moved to March 21st and 22“d. The rescheduling of
this trial was beyond my control. That trial has since been postponed. Then on March 2“d, as
previously indicated, I received notice of a March 23*d meeting for the Third Circuit Lawyer’s Advisory
Committee. VK/hen both of these conflicts arose, the EEOC was immediatelly quickly notified within
days. (Exhibits 1 and 2).
Further, the EEOC fails to mention that they explicitly requested "three days in a row" that I
was available for depositions and to accommodate the EEOC’s explicit request, my office responded
that the only "three days in a row" I was available were April 10, 11 and 12. (Exhibits 3 and 4). VVhen
Ms. Clickner indicated she was unavailable April 12th due to the Passover holiday, we offered April
27*h as an altemative date since she would already be in Wilmington. Apparently our attempt to
accommodate Ms. Clickner’s travel needs were taken as a "disingenuous offer."