Kaiser Aluminum Warrick, LLC v. US Magnesium LLC
- John Koeltl
- 1:22-cv-03105
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 17
In Kaiser Aluminum Warrick v. US Magnesium, Magistrate Judge Parker granted US Magnesium’s application and scheduled a conference about Kaiser’s late witness disclosures.
Kaiser Aluminum Warrick, LLC and US Magnesium, LLC are affected by the scheduling and handling of the discovery dispute. Kaiser must file the specified response, and the parties must participate in the scheduled pre-motion conference.
What happened
Kaiser Aluminum Warrick, LLC sued US Magnesium, LLC over US Magnesium’s reduction of magnesium deliveries after it declared force majeure, a contract provision concerning extraordinary events. Kaiser seeks damages, including claimed lost profits. US Magnesium said Kaiser disclosed 18 new potential third-party witnesses only after fact discovery had ended.
US Magnesium asked for a conference before filing a motion to strike those disclosures. It argued that Kaiser had no justification for the late disclosures, that the witnesses were not critical, and that allowing more discovery would not cure the prejudice because earlier discovery had been planned without knowing Kaiser intended to call them. Kaiser proposed extending the fact-discovery deadline by two weeks and argued that some witness names appeared in documents already produced.
Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker granted the application for a pre-motion conference, required Kaiser to respond by October 9, 2023, and scheduled the conference for October 11, 2023. The provided text does not show a ruling on whether the witness disclosures should ultimately be stricken.
The detailed version
- Kaiser Aluminum Warrick, LLC v. US Magnesium LLC · No. 1:22-cv-03105
- John Koeltl
- Oct. 4, 2023
Background
The underlying case is a commercial dispute concerning a Magnesium Supply Agreement under which US Magnesium agreed to supply magnesium to Kaiser from December 2020 through December 2022. According to US Magnesium’s letter, equipment failures led it to declare force majeure in 2021 and reduce its magnesium supply. Kaiser challenges the legitimacy of that declaration and seeks cover damages and lost profits allegedly resulting from its own later declaration of force majeure to customers.
Discovery dispute
US Magnesium requested a pre-motion conference concerning a proposed motion to strike Kaiser’s allegedly untimely disclosure of 18 new third-party witnesses. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26, parties must disclose individuals who may have discoverable information and whom they may use to support their claims or defenses. US Magnesium argued that Kaiser had known about the witnesses since the beginning of the case but did not disclose that it might call them until one business day after US Magnesium canceled several third-party depositions. US Magnesium asserted that fact discovery had concluded, that it had planned its discovery based on Kaiser’s earlier disclosures, and that a two-week extension would not cure the resulting prejudice.
Kaiser proposed a two-week extension of the fact-discovery deadline and argued that some witnesses’ names may have appeared in documents produced during discovery. The provided text does not include a substantive response from Kaiser to the motion-to-strike request; it includes Kaiser’s supplemental disclosures, which identify employees of Kaiser, employees or representatives of Kaiser’s customers, and other individuals who may have relevant information.
Court action
The document contains a notation stating “APPLICATION GRANTED,” signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker. It also directs Kaiser to file a response of no more than five pages by October 9, 2023, and schedules a conference for October 11, 2023, at 11:30 a.m. The text provided does not state that Judge Parker granted or denied the proposed motion to strike, and it does not provide a final ruling on whether any witnesses will be excluded.
Read the full 17-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.