Case Activity (299)

1. Order | Filed: September 08, 2026 | Entered: September 08, 2026 Sussman et al v. Massachusetts Institute of Technology et al

   Civil Rights: Other | Massachusetts

   Order on Motion to Compel

   Judge Richard G. Stearns: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered denying 101 Motion to Compel.
   
   The court will deny the motion, with the following understanding: (1) MIT intends to complete productions of emails for all custodians by September 15; (2) MIT intends to complete productions of non-email documents for all custodians by September 30; (3) because Professor Roe does not use his cellphone for messaging purposes, imaging his phone is unlikely to produce discoverable material; (4) MIT will produce all documents responsive to RFP Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 7, including the categories of documents identified by plaintiff; (5) any documents responsive to RFP No. 6 will be captured by the parameters of other RFPs; and (6) plaintiff did not identify the incidents described in RFP Nos. 19, 24, and 25 as something he personally experienced in his interrogatory responses.
   
   (The court is not persuaded that the broad discovery requests in RFP Nos. 22 and 26 are relevant to any remaining claim or proportionate to the needs of the case.) (RGS, law3)

2. Order | Filed: September 08, 2026 | Entered: September 08, 2026 Sussman et al v. Massachusetts Institute of Technology et al

   Civil Rights: Other | Massachusetts

   Order on Motion for Discovery

   Judge Richard G. Stearns: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered denying 103 Motion for Discovery. The motion is denied without prejudice to renewal with a more fulsome explanation identifying which specific additional individual(s) plaintiff seeks leave to depose and why. (RGS, law3)

3. 297 additional result(s)