Gupta v. Saxena
- P. Castel
- 1:19-cv-09284
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Gupta v. New Silk Route Advisors, Judge Castel allowed a five-hour deposition and denied the remaining requested relief.
Rishi K. Gupta, the defendants, and non-party Gupta Associates, LLC. Gupta may be deposed for up to five hours on the specified topics; Gupta Associates’ requested relief was denied for lack of standing.
What happened
In Gupta v. New Silk Route Advisors, L.P., Rishi K. Gupta and the defendants disputed issues involving property, documents, electronically stored information, and confidential or privileged information. The defendants also asserted that the dispute related to a confidentiality order, which Gupta denied.
The court allowed the defendants to take a five-hour deposition of Gupta, limited to the possession, control, use, transfer, or dissemination of any property the defendants claimed, including confidential or privileged information and documents. This deposition was in addition to any other deposition in the case.
Judge P. Kevin Castel denied all relief requested by non-party Gupta Associates, LLC because it lacked standing in the action, and denied all other relief sought by any party.
The detailed version
- Gupta v. Saxena · No. 1:19-cv-09284
- P. Castel
- Apr. 23, 2021
Background
The court reviewed letters from the defendants, Gupta, and non-party Gupta Associates, LLC. The opinion discusses disputes over property and information allegedly retained by an employee after employment ended, including documents, electronically stored information, and confidential or privileged information. The defendants argued that the dispute had become related to discovery because Gupta allegedly violated the court’s Stipulation and Order of Confidentiality. Gupta denied that allegation.
Deposition
The court allowed a five-hour deposition of Gupta. The deposition was limited to his possession, control, use, transfer, or dissemination of any property the defendants claimed, including confidential or privileged information and documents. The court stated that this deposition was in addition to any other deposition of Gupta in the action.
Gupta Associates’ Request and Other Relief
Gupta Associates, LLC sought relief concerning a subpoena filed in a state-court action to which a defendant in this case had objected. The court held that Gupta Associates had no standing in this action and denied all requested relief. The court also denied all other relief sought by any party.
Disposition
This was a discovery-related order. The court allowed the specified deposition and denied the requested relief described above.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.