Order: The Court has reviewed — United States v. Visa Inc. (Dkt. 95, S.D.N.Y. No. 1:24-cv-07214)

Summary

Order of Judge John G. Koeltl dated July 26, 2025, in United States of America v. Visa Inc., 24-cv-7214, Southern District of New York, on the parties' Proposed Joint Amended Scheduling Order (ECF No. 94). On additional discovery for newly identified fact witnesses, the Court agrees with Visa that it is premature to determine what additional discovery should be ordered after the close of discovery. On expert depositions, the parties should work out the timing among themselves, but no expert should be deposed more than once, which may require delaying a deposition until all reports have been produced. The parties should make the necessary changes to the Joint Amended Scheduling Order and submit it to the Court for signature.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Record facts

Full text

Text recognized from a scanned document; may contain errors.

Case 1:24-cv-07214-JGK Document95_ Filed 07/26/25 Page1of2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff, 24-cv-7214 (JGK)

- against - ORDER

VISA INC.,
Defendant.

JOHN G. KOELTL, District Judge:

The Court has reviewed the parties’ Proposed Joint Amended
Scheduling Order. See ECF No. 94. There are only two disputed
issues.

First, at page six of the Proposed Joint Amended Scheduling
Order, the parties disagree regarding what additional discovery
may be appropriate for newly identified fact witnesses. The
Court agrees with Visa that it is premature to determine what,
if any, additional discovery should be ordered after the close
of discovery. The parties have shown a great ability to work out
reasonable mutual accommodations. It is premature to attempt to
foresee what additional discovery might be required after the
close of discovery that could not otherwise be accommodated.

Second, at pages eleven to fourteen of the Proposed Joint
Amended Scheduling Order, the parties disagree regarding when
and how frequently experts should be deposed. The parties should
work out the timing of expert depositions among themselves, but

no expert should be deposed more than once. That may require the
Case 1:24-cv-07214-JGK Document95_ Filed 07/26/25 Page 2 of2

parties to delay the deposition of an expert so that all the
reports about which the expert may be testifying will have been
produced. If so, the parties should work out that schedule.

The parties should make the necessary changes to the Joint
Amended Scheduling Order and submit it to the Court for
signature. The Court appreciates the parties’ continuing
cooperation.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: New York, New York
July 26, 2025

(7 John G. Koeltl1
United States District Judge


File and source

File

gov.uscourts.nysd.628802.95.0.pdf

Size

56,988 bytes

SHA-256

13e8aa92c9983fcf15440ed3afe8afe191f915f4eea893480af74e19ffee6b6b

Our copy

gov.uscourts.nysd.628802.95.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)