BenShot LLC v. 2 Monkey Trading LLC, 1:18-cv-01716

Plaintiff BenShot, LLC sued 2 Monkey Trading LLC, Lucky Shot USA LLC, and Douglas Ingalls under the Lanham Act and Wisconsin unfair-competition law for allegedly marketing products as “Made in the USA.”
BenShot moved for leave to take remote, video-recorded trial depositions of two non-party lay witnesses (Brenda Williams in Georgia and Samuel Fuller in Wisconsin) for use at trial; each expected to testify ~30 minutes.
Both witnesses were identified in BenShot’s Rule 26(a)(3) disclosures; discovery had closed on November 17, 2020, and trial was scheduled in about eight weeks.
BenShot argued good cause to reopen discovery under Civil L.R. 26(c) based on the witnesses’ travel burden, narrow testimony, and the benefit of preserving testimony for trial.
Defendants opposed, noting BenShot knew of the witnesses long ago, failed to depose them during the discovery period, and discovery has been closed nearly two years.
The Court applied Civil L.R. 26(c) and the standard that reopening discovery requires good cause; it denied the motion, finding inconvenience and prior knowledge do not justify reopening discovery or substituting remote testimony for live in-court testimony.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether there is good cause to reopen discovery and permit remote video-recorded trial depositions of two non-party witnesses	Witnesses are non-parties, testimony is narrow and short, and travel/time/cost burdens make live testimony impracticable	No good cause: BenShot knew of witnesses long ago, waited until after discovery closed, and trial is imminent	Denied. No good cause to reopen discovery; inconvenience alone insufficient to permit remote trial depositions

None — the opinion relied on unpublished district decisions (WL citations) and the Advisory Committee Note to Fed. R. Civ. P. 43; no officially reported cases were cited.

Disposition: Motion for leave to conduct remote video-recorded depositions DENIED; discovery remains closed.