EDWARD BOBRICK, Magistrate Judge
On March 28, 2003 Defendants, DRH Cambridge Homes, Inc.("Cambridge"), Cowhey, Gundmundson, Leder, Ltd. ("Cowhey"), and Pugsley Lahaie ("Pugsley") filed a Motion to Compel Plaintiff, Ocean Atlantic Woodland Corporation ("OAWC"), to provide answers to questions presented to Christopher Lannert and Stephen Roake in deposition, to produce Philip Havers for deposition, and to respond to outstanding discovery requests ("Defendants' Joint Motion to Compel"). Defendants also filed certain exhibits in camera that date. In addition, Pugsley filed a Motion to Compel OAWC to provide answers to questions presented to Michael Ferraguto in his deposition. On April 14, 2003, OAWC filed a Response to Pugsley Lahaie's Motion to
Compel and Cross-Motion for Protective Order. OAW also filed a Response to Defendants' Motion to Compel on that date. On March 28, 2003, Defendants filed a Reply in Support of Their Motion to Compel.
This Court has reviewed and carefully considered the above-described submissions of the parties and the oral arguments made during the hearing held in open court on April 30, 2003.
For the reasons stated herein and in open court, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1. Defendant Pugsley LaHaie's Motion to Compel further testimony from Mr. Ferraguto is denied and Plaintiffs cross motion for protective order is granted with respect to discovery regarding fraud judgments and/or bankruptcy filings by Michael Ferraguto or any of Mr. Ferraguto's companies.
2. Defendants' Joint Motion to Compel is granted in part and denied in part. Defendants are hereby permitted to take the deposition of Philip Havers. The deposition will take place at the U.S. District Courthouse for the Northern District of Illinois, Dirksen Federal Building, at a time convenient to the Court, the witness and the parties (the parties shall coordinate with the Courtroom Deputy with respect to selecting a location and a time). At his deposition, Mr. Havers is required to give full and complete testimony, and to make full and complete disclosure regarding the facts and rationale underlying the information and representations communicated to the U.S. Copyright Office during the copyright(s) registration processes relevant to this action. Defendants' Joint Motion to Compel the depositions of Mr. Roake and Mr. Lannert is denied.
3. With respect to Defendants' Joint Motion to Compel further answer to Cambridge Interrogatory No. 10 and Cowhey Interrogatory No. 2, the parties are to advise the Court of the status of this discovery dispute, and if not resolved to notice a date before the Court for status of this matter. The remaining issues raised by Defendants' Joint Motion to Compel further discovery are denied as moot except as otherwise set forth in this order.
4. With respect to the in camera documents this Court makes the following rulings.
(A) The June 1, 2000 engagement letter from Gardner Carton Douglas to Mr. Stephen Roake is subject to the attorney-client privilege, not available to discovery, and therefore, shall be maintained under seal of this Court.
(B) The documents with Bates Nos. OAWC 351 1-OAWC 3516 are not subject to the attorney-client privilege. Parties are free to use these documents as may be appropriate under the Federal Rules.
5. Discovery shall remain open at the present time, but shall be limited to (1) scheduling the depositions of Philip Havers and Bruce Bruckelmeyer; (2) resolution of outstanding discovery requests between the parties, and other matters which the parties are attempting to resolve amongst themselves; and (3) those discovery matters pending before the Court. No new discovery shall be issued without further order of Court, except Plaintiff may serve a subpoena for deposition upon Bruce Bruckelmeyer from Midwest Technical Consultants.