Judgment: BIOTE MEDICAL, LLC vs. NEAL ROUZIER, MD

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

						
                                
Preview
                                CAUSE NO. DC-18-09135

BIOTE MEDICAL, LLC,                                        §           IN   THE DISTRICT COURT
                                                           §
         Plaintiff,                                        §
                                                           §
V.                                                         §           44th    JUDICIAL DISTRICT
                                                           §
NEAL ROUZIER, M.D.,                                        §
                                                           §
         Defendant.                                        §           DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

                 SECOND AMENDED ORDER GRANTING DISCOVERY
              REGARDING ANTI-SLAPP MOTION AND SETTING DEADLINES

         On October       19,   2018, came 0n for consideration     BioTE Medical, LLC’s (“BioTE”) Motion

for Expedited Discovery            under TEX. CIV. PRAC.        &   REM. CODE 27.006(b) and Motion            for


Continuance ofHearing on Motion t0 Dismiss Pursuant to TEX. CIV. PRAC.                  & REM. CODE 27.004(c)

(the   “Motion      for Discovery”),   and   after considering the pleadings   on file herein, and the arguments

0f counsel,    it   appears to the Court that good cause exists.


         IT   IS,   THEREFORE, ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that BioTE’s Motion

for Discovery is       GRANTED as indicated below.

         IT IS      FURTHER ORDERED that BioTE may take the deposition ofNeal Rouzier, M.D.

(“Defendant”) and serve 5 written interrogatories and 5 requests for production on the following


topics: the information         0f BioTE that Defendant had access to While working With BioTE, the


information of BioTE that Defendant took 0r has in his possession, the information of BioTE that


Defendant has used or incorporated into his current            activities or   shared with others, and to   whom

such information has been shared. BioTE              may take the deposition of Defendant limited t0 two      (2)


hours; such preliminary deposition does not prejudice BioTE’ s right t0 re-depose Defendant at a later




SECOND AMENDED ORDER GRANTING DISCOVERY
REGARDING ANTI—SLAPP MOTION AND SETTING DEADLINES                                                       PAGE   1
date 0n the full merits 0fthe case in preparation for trial.               The parties      are   ORDERED t0 cooperate in

the scheduling of depositions.       Three days before the scheduled deposition, BioTE                        shall provide


Defendant With copies of any documents that                 it   intends t0 use during the deposition that were not


produced t0 BioTE by Defendant pursuant                   t0 this Order.      BioTE     shall serve its written discovery


requests and deposition notice      upon Defendant n0              later   than Friday, October 26, 2018. Defendant


shall serve his responses to     BioTE’s written discovery                at least   seven (7) days before the scheduled


deposition.


             IT IS   FURTHER ORDERED that the hearing 0n Defendant’s TCPA Motion t0 Dismiss

currently scheduled for October 3      1,   20 1 8   is   hereby removed from the Court’s docket in accordance


with §27.004(c) 0fthe        TCPA and reset for January            16,   2019   at   8:00   am. BioTE filed its Response

t0 Defendant’s        TCPA Motion to Dismiss on December 7, 2018. BioTE may amend or supplement

its      Response 0r before January 4, 2019. Defendant              shall file his reply, if any,       0n 0r before January

1   0,   201 9.


             IT IS   FURTHER ORDERED that all other discovery not specifically authorized herein is

stayed pending the Court’s ruling on Defendant’s                  TCPA Motion to Dismiss.

             SIGNED this           day 0f December, 2018             at              o’clock   pm.




                                                                     JUDGE PRESIDING




SECOND AMENDED ORDER GRANTING DISCOVERY
REGARDING ANTI—SLAPP MOTION AND SETTING DEADLINES                                                                  PAGE 2
AGREED AS TO FORM:

/s/ Ryan K. Lurich

Ryan K. Lurich
Attorney for Plaintiff



/s/   Gregory M.   Clift

Gregory M.   Clift
Attorney for Defendant




#857112




SECOND AMENDED ORDER GRANTING DISCOVERY
REGARDING ANTI—SLAPP MOTION AND SETTING DEADLINES   PAGE 3