Legal Opinion
Kellogg Brown & Root Services, Inc. v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
Decided June 26, 2014No. 1:12-cv-00366PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Motion for Protective Order; discovery; document request; RCFC 26(c)(1); good cause; relevancy; overbroad; undue burden; cumulative; duplicative; timeliness; government contract
OPINION AND ORDER
CAMPBELL-SMITH, Chief Judge
The United States government (government or defendant) has filed a Motion for Protective Order, pursuant to Rule 26 of the Rules of the United States Court of Federal Claims (RCFC), seeking to be relieved of the duty to respond to plaintiffs Document Requests Nos. 3 and 4 of its Third Request for Production of Documents. Def.’s Mot. Prot. Order (Def.’s Mot.), Nov. 14, 2013,…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Hickman v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Kim Patterson v. Avery Dennison CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2002
- Moore U.S.A., Inc.,plaintiff-Appellant v. Standard Register Company,defendant-CrossCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2000
- Florsheim Shoe Company, Div. Of Interco, Inc. v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
- Missouri Pacific Railroad Company v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1964
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Science Applications International Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2021
- Science Applications International Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2021