Many of us have the experience of going home again for a while. Maybe you just got back from college and haven't found a decent job yet. Maybe you had a breakup and you needed a place to stay while you sorted out a new place. Maybe your prior home was consumed by a vengeful earth reclaiming what you had stolen.
In any case, going home is rarely the result of things going exactly how you'd want them to.
For no reason at all, this leads me to Judge Connolly's recent order in Inari Medical, Inc. f/k/a Inceptus Newco1 Inc. v. Inquis Medical, Inc., C.A. No 24-1023-CFC (D. Del. Mar. 12, 2026) (Oral Order). Judge Connolly had referred the case to Magistrate Judge Tennyson early last year when the parties raised a protective order dispute. Since then, the parties had filed five motions for discovery dispute teleconferences. Upon the filing of the fifth, rather than receiving the usual order scheduling a teleconference, Judge Connolly issued the oral order below:
The Court's January 21, 2025 oral order referring the case to Magistrate Judge Eleanor G. Tennyson for all matters relating to discovery and the protective order is WITHDRAWN. The joint motion for a teleconference to resolve discovery disputes (D.I. 289 ) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. The Court will hear oral argument in person in Courtroom 4B on April 9, 2026 at 9:00 a.m. on the matters outlined in the joint motion. The parties should expect that going forward in this action the party that loses a discovery or protective order dispute will pay for the costs and fees the winning party incurred in litigating that dispute. As both parties have said they are available on April 9, see D.I. 289 at 4, the Court will not agree to move the April 9 argument, though obviously the Court does not oppose canceling the argument if the parties reach an agreement that resolves the disputes in question. The movant for any particular issue must file no later than March 20, 2026 a letter in support of its motion and a proposed order that specifies the exact relief being sought. The respondent shall file no later than April 1, 2026 a letter in response. The letters must be in 14-point font and shall not exceed 1,250 words.
Id.
It's pretty rare to see the Court discuss fees in the context of a discovery dispute, and the move to an in-person conference is also uncommon (although less so). It'll be interesting to see if we get more of these orders for cases that cross the 5-dispute Rubicon.
We'll keep you posted.
If you enjoyed this post, consider subscribing to receive free e-mail updates about new posts.
